Sarah Sabina Meyer

F, #16141, b. 1865, d. 31 Mar 1873
Father*Johann Wilhelm Meyer b. 4 Jan 1820, d. 24 May 1901
Mother*Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Birth*1865 Berwick, VIC, Australia, #B20530.1 
Death*31 Mar 1873 Harkaway, VIC, Australia, #D3344 (Age 7.)1 
Inquest3 Apr 1873Inquest held 1873/94 Female. Sarah Sabina MYERS Cause of death: Drowned; Location of inquest: Berwick; Date of inquest: 03 Apr 1873.2 

Newspaper-Articles

  • 9 Apr 1873: Another inquest was held at Berwick, on the body of Selina Meyers, aged seven years. The deceased was on a visit to her sister, when she went into the yard to get some clothes, and by some means unknown fell into a tank. There were no marks of violence on the body. The jury found that she was accidentally drowned.3

Citations

  1. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  2. [S24] PROV (Public Records Office Victoria), VPRS 24/ P0 unit 299, item 1873/94 Female.
  3. [S16] Newspaper - The Age (Melbourne, Vic.), 9 Apr 1873, p3.
Last Edited13 Jun 2019

Mary Elizabeth Meyer

F, #16142, b. 1856, d. 14 Feb 1926
Father*Johann Wilhelm Meyer b. 4 Jan 1820, d. 24 May 1901
Mother*Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Married NameRickard. 
Married NameBarr. 
Married NameChurch. 
Birth*1856 Berwick, VIC, Australia. 
Marriage*15 Jul 1871 Spouse: William George Church. VIC, Australia, #M3476 - George William 21 (Bachelor) of South Australia Occupation - Sawyer married Mary Elizabeth Meyer 15 (spinster) House Servant of Harkaway Berwick.1,2,3
 
Marriage*23 Jan 1895 Spouse: Albert Rickard. Fitzroy, VIC, Australia, #M1209. Albert was 50 years old and widowed in 1894 when he married "Lizzie" and had 1 child. Mary Elizabeth "Lizzie" was supposedly widowed in 1890 and had 3 living children and 2 deceased at time of wedding. In fact she had 11 children.4
 
Marriage*1900 Spouse: Alan Barr. Rockhampton, QLD, Australia, #M C1965.5,6
 
Widow7 May 1915Mary Elizabeth Meyer became a widow upon the death of her husband Albert Rickard.4 
Death*14 Feb 1926 232 Park Road, Paddington, NSW, Australia, #D2132/1926 [par William J & Ernestina].7 
Death-Notice*16 Feb 1926BARR. -The Remains of the late ELIZABETH BARR were interred in Church of England Cemetery, Waverley, YESTERDAY. MONDAY, at 3 p.m.8 

Newspaper-Articles

  • 9 Mar 1914: About 7 p.m. on Saturday the police received a report of an alleged shooting affray at Rosslea Estate in which a woman named Mrs Elisabeth Barr, aged about 50, sustained gunshot wounds on her left side and back. Inspector Sweetman instituted inquiries, and as a result her husband, Allan Barr, has been arrested, and will be charged at the Police Court this morning. Mrs Barr was removed to the hospital. Alan Barr9
  • 10 Mar 1914: The Rosslea Shooting Case.
    A sequel to the incident at Rosslea Estate on Saturday last, when a man named Allen Barr is alleged to have shot at Elizabeth Barr was heard at the Police Court yesterday, before Mr A. Dean. P.M., when Allen Barr appeared on a charge of unlawfully attempting to kill. Accused pleaded not guilty.
    Constable James Portley stated that a complaint was made to him about 7 p.m. on Saturday, in consequence of which, in company with Constable Littman, he went in search of defendant. They saw defendant with a man named Ah Foo on the Charters Towers road. Witness said to defendant. "I have been informed that you fired at and shot your wife this evening and that the shot struck her on the left arm and neck." Defendant replied that he fired a blank charge in the air. In answer to a query, defendant said he did not know where his gun was now, and refused to answer any questions. Witness subsequently conveyed defendant to the watch-house, where he formally arrested him on a charge of unlawfully attempting to kill one Elizabeth Barr at Rosslea Estate on the night of the 7th inst. Defendant said, "It's a lie. I don't believe she is shot at all." Defendant, who said he had not the means to pay a professional man to appear for him, asked his Worship if the charge could be reduced to something less serious. He said he had no intention of killing the woman, and that he feared violence from Annie Low's husband, who was present. Annie Low's proper name was Annie Stagg. He stated that he had come from Sydney and had only been in the north for about five weeks. His Worship said he could not reduce the charge at present, but when the evidence of the prosecution had been completed he could, if he thought proper, discharge or reduce any indictable charge. On the implication of Sergeant Martin, a remand of eight days was granted. Alan Barr10
  • 17 Mar 1914: Townsville Police Court. MONDAY, MARCH 16.
    ROSSLEA SHOOTING AFFRAY. Alan Barr, on remand, was charged with attempting to unlawfully kill Elizabeth Barr at Rosslea Estate on March 7th.
    Constable C. Littman said that on Saturday, 7th inst., in consequence of a complaint, he went to defendant's house at Rosslea Estate. He there saw Constable Portley and a man named Ah Foo. In consequence of something he heard, he went to Hermit Park Hotel, where he saw the defendant, who said to witness: "I suppose you are coming for me." Witness replied: "I am informed you shot your wife this evening." Witness gave him the usual caution. Defendant replied: "I will not answer any of your questions. If you had the worry I had you would do the same. Annie Lowe and Tom Stagg were at my place, and we had a row. I told them to go away or I would shoot them. I took the gun and fired above their heads to frighten them." Witness said: "Your wife is shot, and I want you to accompany me." Defendant replied: "Is she much hurt?" Witness told defendant she was in the hospital. On the way towards the Police Station with accused, the latter said : "You will have to find the gun. I married a widow, and she was a prostitute."
    Defendant: That is a lie. I did not say that.
    Witness, continuing, said that later on Constable Portley joined them, and accompanied them to the Police Station, where accused was formally charged. He replied: "It's a damned lie."
    By the Bench: In conversation, accused mentioned the name Thomas Stagg, and said: "Annie Lowe and Tom Stagg were at my place and had a row." By defendant: He understood Annie Lowe was the wife of Tom Stagg. It was not possible that defendant said to him: "I married a widow. Her
    daughter is a prostitute." It is possible he said she is a prostitute, intending to refer to the woman Annie Lowe.
    Constable James Portley, re-called, said on Sunday, 8th inst, he made a search near the house where the alleged shooting took place. He found a single barrelled breech loading shot gun outside the house yard fence. (Gun tendered.) On the 9th inst. Mrs Stagg handed him a parcel of clothes, and on the 11th a cartridge. (Tendered.) On the same day Lucy Lowe came to him with a cartridge wad. On the 15th inst. Dr. Breinl handed witness six pellets or grains of shot. (Tendered.)
    That morning witness had examined a buggy at Mrs Stagg's house, and found about 30 pellet holes in it. He took six pellets from six of the holes in the presence of Mrs Stagg. By defendant: On the 10th the Watchhouse-keeper telephoned to him that the defendant had told him where the gun was, and that locality agreed with where he had previously found the gun.
    Annie Stagg, married woman, residing with her husband at Hermit Park, Townsville, said her name was Annie Lowe until four months ago, when she was married to Joseph Stagg, commonly known as Thomas Stagg. Defendant was her step-father, and Amelia Barr was her mother. On 7th inst. she called at her mother's place at Rosslea Estate. Witness dove there in a buggy with her husband and daughter Lucy Lowe. Witness did not get out of the buggy. Defendant was sitting on the verandah. He appeared to be cross, and witness thought he had been drinking. Witness asked her mother, in the hearing of defendant, to come for a drive, and she refused, as she thought there was going to be trouble. Defendant said: "Yes, there will be trouble, and — big trouble, too." Witness said to her mother: "You had better come," and she said "No. I'll work in the garden, and won't speak to him." Then she started to cry. Witness drove away, and returned about 7 p.m. Her husband and daughter were still with her. They passed the defendant on the road.
    When she got to the house she saw her mother, and shortly after defendant came in and closed the gate behind him. He went to the back through the house. Her mother said: "I think I'll go." Defendant said: "I think you had — well get out of the house as quick as you can." Witness replied: "I think you had better go, Jack." He used abusive language to her, and went outside. Witness saw him through the window striking matches and looking everywhere. He went to the sideboard drawer and took something out of it, and then witness heard the click of a gun, as if it was being loaded. Defendant called out: "Where are you now?" and her husband replied: "Here I am," and stood near the buggy. Defendant pointed the gun at her husband, who said: "Put that away; don't be silly." Defendant then moved the gun and pointed it at witness. Her mother came out and said; "There's nothing in it, Annie. Don't be frightened," Defendant said: "Isn't there nothing?" and took something from his pocket. He said: "No, I won't shoot you. I'll shoot the — — of a woman I've wasted my life for for 14 years."
    Witness said: "Oh, come on, mother." and the horses started towards the gate. Her mother was running towards the buggy. She saw defendant fire a shot, and her mother fell down crying out: "Oh, I'm shot." She got up and fell again. Defendant jumped over the verandah and ran to the gate, and pointing his gun towards the buggy, said: "I have shot your mother, and there's one for you and one for myself." Witness then screamed, and her husband and mother climbed into the buggy, and they drove to the Mundingburra Police Station, thence to the Ambulance, and from there to the hospital. She helped to undress her mother at the hospital, and now produced the clothes her mother was wearing at the time.
    By Sergeant Martin: Defendant was standing at the gate when he said "There's one for you and one for me." By defendant: Witness did not know if defendant had any drink or not. Witness did not abuse defendant. She had always treated him with respect.
    She did not tell her husband to give defendant a hiding. Witness was certain she saw the gun at defendant's shoulder before the buggy moved. The buggy was about 30 yards outside the gate when her mother was helped into it. Witness could not say if her mother had the deeds of the house. Witness gave her mother the house. By Sergeant Martin: She found 31 shot marks in the buggy afterwards. Joseph Stagg, who said he was known as Thomas Stagg, and was husband of last witness, gave corroborative evidence. Witness had had no quarrel with defendant and had been on good terms with him.
    At this stage the hearing was further remanded until the 23rd inst. Alan Barr11
  • 31 Mar 1914: SHOOTING CASE. At the Police Court on Monday before Mr A. Dean, P.M., Allan Barr, on remand, was charged with unlawfully attempting to kill one Elizabeth Barr, at Rosslea Estate, on March 7, 1914. Sergeant Martin prosecuted, and the accused was undefended. Lucy Lowe, a single girl, residing with her mother at Hermit Park, stated she knew the defendant, and also Elizabeth Barr, who is her grandmother. On Saturday afternoon, 7th instant, she went to her grandmother's place, in company with her mother and step-father, about two o'clock, and after a little while drove away. They came back about 7 o'clock, and on the way back passed the defendant on the road. When they arrived at the house, her grandmother and cousin were there. Shortly afterwards the defendant came in the gate and closed it behind him, and went into the house and then on to the front verandah. At this time, Mrs Stagg was in the buggy, and her husband was standing at the back of it. Witness went to catch a pony, and they were all standing near the house. Witness heard some words being passed between the defendant and witness's mother, but she did not know what they were exactly. The defendant started swearing, and witness's mother told him he would not stay it to a man. The defendant said—"Where is your husband?" and witness's step-father said. —"Here I am." Then the defendant entered the house saying, "I'll soon settle you." He remained in the house for some time, striking matches, and going from one room to another. Witness sent her cousin in to see what he was doing and she came out quickly. Witness was then harnessing up the pony, for her grandmother to come to town. The defendant came out to the front verandah with a gun in his hand, and witness heard him using bad language. He put the barrel of the gun against the post to take aim, and he then said, "I'll shoot the lot of you." Witness's grandmother said—"Don't be frightened Annie, the gun's not loaded." The defendant said. —"Ain't it? I'll soon show you whether it is or not." He then to witness's mother said.—"Go, say go; leave the yard, or I'll shoot you's." The buggy was then driven towards the gate which witness's step-father opened. Witness's grandmother said she would go with witness's mother, and the horses bolted out towards the front of the house. Witness then heard a gun shot, and she saw her grandmother fall. Witness thought her grandmother was nine or ten yards away from the defendant when she fell. When she did, she said.—"I'm shot, I'm shot."
    Witness's mother said.—"No, you're not." Witness let the horse go, and ran to her, and saw bloodstains on her sleeve. Witness's step-father and witness helped her grandmother into the buggy. When the buggy got outside the gate, the defendant jumped the verandah rail, and ran towards the gate. When he got there, he put the gun up and said.—"I'll shoot you's," or something like that." On the 5th instant, witness, defendant and her sister were out riding, and when passing one of the neighbors' places, some dogs rushed out at the horses. Defendant said he would shoot them one of these days; and also said that he had three cartridges at home.
    Dorothy Barr, daughter of Elizabeth Barr, stated that on the morning of the 7th instant, defendant and her mother had a few words, and defendant called her mother a bad name. Witness also gave corroborative evidence to the previous witness in regard to the shooting.
    Dr Breinl, duly qualified medical practitioner, gave evidence to the effect that he saw Elizabeth Barr on the morning of March 8, at the Townsville Hospital and examined her. He found she was suffering from shot wounds on her back, and on her upper left arm. The wounds were only superficial, and out of them a number of small pellets of shot were extracted.
    Elizabeth Barr stated she was the wife of the defendant in the case. The witness was then informed of the charge against the defendant, and that she was not compelled to give evidence against her husband on this charge. She was asked if she was willing to give evidence, and she answered "Yes". The witness thereafter remarked.—"I don't think I will give evidence against him." The accused, who reserved his defence, was then committed to stand his trial at the next Criming Sittings of the Supreme Court to be held on May 9th next. Alan Barr12
  • 23 May 1914: Northern Supreme Court. CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
    The criminal sittings of the Northern Supreme Court was continued on Friday before His Honor Mr Acting Justice Jameson.
    Allan Barr charged with the attempted murder of Elizabeth Barr, at Townsville, on March 1, pleaded not guilty. Mr Hutcheon (instructed by Messrs Roberts, Lea and Barnett), appeared for accused.
    Constable C. Littman, stationed at Townsville, detailed a conversation he had with accused on the evening of the occurrence prior to his arrest, in which he said the charge was a — lie, and that he had only used a blank cartridge. "Annie and Tom Stagg," accused continued, "came to my place, where we had a row. I told them I would shoot them, but fired over their heads." When told his wife was shot, prisoner asked if she was much hurt.
    Cross-examined by Mr Hutcheon: Prisoner was sober, but had evidently been drinking. Constable Jas. Portley, stationed at Mundingburra, confirmed the previous witness's statement. He arrested prisoner on the present charge, when he stated. "It is a lie. I don't believe she is shot at all." On March 8 at prisoner's house, he found a single-barrel breech-loading gun, which he produced, also some clothing and a cartridge from Mrs Stagg, and six pellets received from Dr Breinl. Witness examined a buggy at Mrs Stagg's house, from which he extracted five or six pellets out of a number embedded in the back of the buggy.
    Cross-examined by Mr Hutcheon: On Sunday about 11, witness was at prisoner's house. Did not see a cartridge on the gate post, which was about 8 feet high. The cartridge was handed to witness on Wednesday. He possibly saw Mrs Stagg on Tuesday. The buggy was examined by witness a week later. The pellets were on the back of the buggy and the back of both seats—about 30 marks. The shot was small. The whole 36 would fit on a shilling. The spot where Mrs Barr was alleged to have been shot was 20 yards from the house. There were bloodstains on the garments given to witness.
    Annie Stagg, wife of Joseph Stagg, said prisoner was her step father. Prisoner had been away from Townsville for years, but returned a few weeks before the occurrence. On March 7, witness drove to prisoner's house with her mother and husband, and a couple of children. Asked her mother to come for a drive, but she said there might be trouble if she did. Prisoner said, "Yes, there would be." Returned about 6.30, when they passed prisoner, who arrived soon after. Prisoner entered the house by the back, and came on the front verandah. Witness asked her mother to come with her, and she consented. Prisoner said, "Yes, you had better all clear out." After some hot words, prisoner went inside and struck some matches, coming out with a gun, saying, "Where are you now?" to witness's husband, and pointed the gun at him. Witness's mother said the gun was not loaded, prisoner had two cartridges in his hand. He opened and closed the gun, saying, "I won't shoot you, but I'll shoot your mother." Witness leaned the gun on the verandah post, and fired at Mrs Barr, who was going quickly towards the buggy. She fell, crying out, "I'm shot." She got up again and came to the buggy. Prisoner jumped from the verandah and ran towards the gate, saying, "I have two more cartridges, one for you, and one for myself." Witness identified the gun. All then drove to the Police Station, and then to the Ambulance and Hospital, with Mrs Barr. Witness identified some clothing worn by Mrs Barr, showing blood-stains, and over thirty small perforations, in the blouse. On the following Monday, witness found a cartridge on the gate post, which she gave to Constable Portley. (Cartridge identified.) Witness counted the shots in a similar cartridge to that produced, and found that there were 160. Prisoner did not seem drunk. Cross-examined by Mr Hutcheon: Prisoner could hear witness plainly at the gate from the verandah. Witness did not remember saying in the Police Court that she saw prisoner take a cartridge from the sideboard drawer. She saw him distinctly through the window, as he was striking matches. Witness owned the gun, which she used for shooting in the bush, and gave it to her brother, who was then at her mother's. She gave her brother three cartridges. Witness found a cartridge on the gate post, and gave it to her brother, who was then at her mother's. She gave her brother three cartridges. Witness found a cartridge on the gate post, and gave it to the constable the first time she saw him. The buggy was at the gate when the gun was fired, and her mother was coming to the buggy. Prisoner had been drinking that day, but could walk steadily.
    Dr Anton Breinl deposed that on March 7, Mrs Barr was brought to the Townsville Hospital, where he was in charge. She was suffering from gun-shot wounds on her arms and back. The skin was perforated, but the wounds were not serious. There were 30 or 40 perforations, and she must have suffered considerable pain.
    Cross-examined by Mr Hutcheon: The shots were extracted on March 8. A large number of shots had penetrated deeply, and could not have been extracted.
    by His Honor: The shots could not have penetrated the heart from the back, but might have, from the front. Jos. Stagg fully corroborated his wife's evidence.
    Cross-examined by Mr Hutcheon: Mrs Stagg and prisoner had a row, and angry words passed. They have previously had trouble about a horse. Mrs Stagg said, "Don't be frightened, the cartridges are blank." Accused was taking a deliberate aim when he fired. Lucie Lowe gave corroborative evidence. Alan Barr13
  • 23 May 1914: AFTERNOON SITTINGS. After the usual adjournment the jurors not empanelled were discharged till 10 o'clock on Monday morning. Mr Hutcheon: Mrs Stagg did not say the cartridges were blank, but that there was nothing in the gun. Witness found a cartridge wad, marked it, and gave it to Constable Portley. She found the wad close to where Mrs Barr fell. Witness did not hear her mother tell her father to get out of the trap and give Barr a hiding. Dorothy Barr, an adopted daughter of Elizabeth Barr, said prisoner, after the first few weeks after his arrival from south became very cross and was constantly quarrelling. Some trouble occurred at breakfast on March 7. Mr Barr went to town that day and returned before dinner. Accused, at dinner, said his wife might be poisoning him, threw his plate on the floor and went to his room. Witness described the occurrences of the afternoon similarly to the previous witnesses. During the altercation prisoner said to Mrs Barr that she had better go while she was safe. Witness had seen two or three cartridges on the sideboard in Barrs' house. Accused did not show any signs of having drink on the day in question.
    Cross-examined by Mr Hutcheon: Witness had discussed the case with her mother, who told her what had happened. The gun was in the house when witness came, and the cartridges she first saw some time afterwards. This closed the case for the prosecution.
    William Barr, the prisoner, then gave evidence, saying that on March 7 he resided at Rosslea Estate, after being in Sydney and Melbourne for 11 years. His wife had visited her children in Townsville every year, for some months. Witness left the Liverpool asylum in Sydney for the indigent sick before coming to Townsville. On March 7 Mr and Mrs Stagg and some children came to witnesss house. Words occurred between himself and Annie Stagg about the adopted child, which Stagg thought was his. Mrs Stagg started annoying witness, and reckoned he was not working enough for her. Witness was very much excited over the adoption of the baby girl by a woman like Annie Lowe. Mr Stagg was under the impression that the child was his. That child was born in Sydney about two years ago, and was brought to Townsville and pushed on to Stagg as his child. Witness considered that a serious wrong and expressed himself to that effect. Mrs Stagg thereupon called witness a "bludgeon." At 7 o'clock he was again insulted, and sworn at and called a bludgeon. Mrs Stagg told her husband to get down and give witness a hiding. Witness got excited, rushed in, got a gun and cartridges, which he took to be blank, loaded the gun with one and came out. Witness had never seen the cartridges before. Stagg was approaching and witness fired, as he thought, over their heads, certainly at no particular one. Mrs Barr said "Don't be frightened. They are only blank cartridges." Witness was weak and excited, and fired to keep Stagg back.
    Cross-examined by Mr Ross: Witness landed in Australia in 1891, and had lately been travelling for Blackwell, a tailor, for five or six years, off and on. Was convicted of malicious injury in Sydney for having broken his stepsons window. He objected to Stagg being victimised by having an adopted child pointed on him. Previously to the occurrence, when he wanted to shoot a dog, his wife told him the cartridges were blank. The evidence that witness brought home the cartridges to shoot a dog with was false. Witness fired to keep the others from attacking him. This closed the evidence for the defence. Mr Hutcheon maintained that prisoner had given a straight-forward account of what took place. This account was corroborated by some of the Crown witnesses one of whom said Mrs Barr told Barr that the cartridges were blank. The gun was not prisoner's. Prisoner was excited and feared an assault, he searched for some time, and thereupon could not have known where the cartridges were. Prisoner came out in an excited state, rammed in the cartridges and then heard Mrs Barr say they were blank. He took her at her word, and had sufficient provocation for firing, fearing an assault. He asked the jury to decide that prisoner had no intention to injure anyone in firing the gun.
    Mr Ross said the case was a very simple one. The question of intention was the only one really to decide. That prisoner shot his wife there was no doubt. Accused did not say he thought the cartridge was blank before he put it in the gun. He loaded a lethal weapon, and came out with intent to shoot someone. Why should Mrs Barr say the cartridges were blank? There were no blank cartridges sold except for ceremonial purposes. Prisoner had confessed to have been in a state of passion at the time, and everything pointed to his shooting at his wife to kill her. His threats to shoot someone pointed to this. His intent must be drawn from his act. When a man says "I will shoot you" and then shoots he must surely be accountable for his action. To find accused guilty of a common assault would be taking a much too lenient view of the matter. Prisoners plea of acting in self-defence was absurd, upon the face of it, as all were moving away from him at the time.
    His Honor briefly summed up, recapitulating the evidence for the Crown and the defence. After argument by counsel, his Honor directed the jury that they could find prisoner guilty for shooting with intent to kill, or of common assault. They must decide from the evidence whether they thought prisoner fired what he thought was a blank cartridge or not, and whether he aimed over the persons' heads. The jury retired at 4.40, and returned to court at 5.15, with a verdict of guilty of attempting unlawfully to kill. Prisoner was remanded for sentence, and the court was adjourned till Monday, at 10 a.m. Alan Barr13
  • 27 May 1914: ATTEMPTING TO KILL. Alan Barr was presented for sentence on a charge of attempting to kill. Mr Hutcheon tendered a certificate of the prisoner's character. His Honor imposed a sentence of three years' imprisonment, pointing out that the offence was punishable by imprisonment for life. It was very strange that certificates of character were some times given by men who really knew little of the real characters of the man. The prisoner had been under the influence of drink, but for the protection of the public his Honor thought it as well that the prisoner should go to a place where he would be a stranger to that violent passion for a while. Alan Barr14
  • 18 Feb 1926: RETURN THANKS. Mrs. URQUHART and Mrs. STAGG (Queensland), Mr. and Mrs. Grant, Underwood-street, Paddington, Mr. and Mrs. Church, Newcastle, Allan and Neta Barr desire to convey sincere THANKS to the Rev. Mr. Southgate, Mrs. Reid, Nurse Sheehan, all kind neighbours and friends for floral tributes and tokens of sympathy during their recent sad bereavement in the loss of their dear mother, Elizabeth Barr, Warra wee Flats, Park-road, Paddington.15

Citations

  1. [S22] Victorian Government. BDM Index Victoria (online).
  2. [S34] PROV (Public Records Office Victoria), Inquest into younger sister's death VPRS 24/P0000 unit 299, item 1873/94.
  3. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, Roslyn Poole - Marriage Information.
  4. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, Roslyn Poole.
  5. [S8] Queensland Government Birth, Death & Marriage Indexes.
  6. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, urquhartoz - gives place.
  7. [S7] Registry of NSW Births Deaths and Marriages "BARR ELIZABETH M 2132/1926 WILLIAM J ERNESTINA PADDINGTON."
  8. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Tue 16 Feb 1926, p9
    Mrs. KIRBY and SON, LTD., Funeral Director. 153 Phillip-street, city.
  9. [S14] Newspaper - Townsville Daily Bulletin (Qld.), Mon 9 Mar 1914, p4.
  10. [S14] Newspaper - Townsville Daily Bulletin (Qld.), Tue 10 Mar 1914, p3.
  11. [S14] Newspaper - Townsville Daily Bulletin (Qld.), Tue 17 Mar 1914, p3.
  12. [S14] Newspaper - Townsville Daily Bulletin (Qld.), Tue 31 Mar 1914, p3.
  13. [S14] Newspaper - Townsville Daily Bulletin (Qld.), Sat 23 May 1914, p2.
  14. [S14] Newspaper - Townsville Daily Bulletin (Qld.), Wed 27 May 1914, p2.
  15. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Thu 18 Feb 1926, p10.
Last Edited14 Jun 2019

Johannes Gottlieb Traugott Meyer

M, #16143, b. 1861, d. 10 Jul 1934
Father*Johann Wilhelm Meyer b. 4 Jan 1820, d. 24 May 1901
Mother*Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Name Variation Johannes Gottlieb Traugott Meyer was also known as Ishu Meyer. 
Birth*1861 Berwick, VIC, Australia, #B5225 - listed as Johannes Gottlieb TRANGOTT.1 
Marriage*1883 Spouse: Margaret Mary Madigan. Lancefield, VIC, Australia, #M5756.2
 
Widower18 Sep 1893Johannes Gottlieb Traugott Meyer became a widower upon the death of his wife Margaret Mary Madigan.3
Marriage*2 Oct 1895 Spouse: Rebecca Florence Dummett. St Thomas Church, Moonee Ponds, VIC, Australia, #M5527 - listed as Jno Trangatt MEYER & Rebekah DUMMETT.4
Death*10 Jul 1934 26 Chapel-street, St Kilda, VIC, Australia, #D5862 (Age 72.)5
Death-Notice*11 Jul 1934MEYER.— On the 10th July, at 26 Chapel-street, St. Kilda, John Trangott, late of Royal Hotel, Tungamah, now of Burgooney, N.S.W., beloved husband of Rebecca Florence, and loving father of William, Mabel (Mrs. Gurney), Maggie (Mrs. Jane), John, Rita (Mrs. Blom), Sylvia, Edmund, Reg and Alex, aged 72 years. A patient sufferer at rest.
MEYER.— On the 10th July, loving father of Ruby and Wille, also grandpa of Jack, Thelma, Eddie and Ronnie. Sweet peace, the gift of God's love.
MEYER.—On the 10th July, at 28 Chapel-street, St. Kilda, John Trangott, beloved father of Sylvia. --Inserted by his loving daughter, of Narandera.6 

Citations

  1. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  2. [S22] Victorian Government. BDM Index Victoria (online) "as MEYERS."
  3. [S22] Victorian Government. BDM Index Victoria (online).
  4. [S22] Victorian Government. BDM Index Victoria (online) "certificate lists John as a widower since 1893 with 4 living children."
  5. [S22] Victorian Government. BDM Index Victoria (online) "[par Meyer Johann Wm & Ernestine Remain]."
  6. [S16] Newspaper - The Age (Melbourne, Vic.), 11 Jul 1934, p1.
Last Edited11 Jun 2019

Ernestine Elenora Marie Meyer

F, #16144, b. 1862, d. 20 Jun 1945
Father*Johann Wilhelm Meyer b. 4 Jan 1820, d. 24 May 1901
Mother*Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Married NameHunt. 
Birth*1862 Berwick, VIC, Australia, #B19263.1 
Marriage*1879 Spouse: Edwin Hunt. VIC, Australia, #M3434.2
 
Widow4 Dec 1919Ernestine Elenora Marie Meyer became a widow upon the death of her husband Edwin Hunt.3 
Death*20 Jun 1945 St Kilda, VIC, Australia, #D6351 (Age 83) - as HUNT.4 
Death-Notice*22 Jun 1945HUNT.—The Funeral of the late Mrs. ERNESTINE HUNT will leave Padbury's chapel, 13 Cotham road, Kew, THIS DAY (Friday), at the conclusion of a service commencing at 11 a.m., for the Box Hill Cemetery.5 
Death-Notice23 Jun 1945HUNT.—On June 20, at Alma Nursing Hospital, Ernestine, beloved wife of late Edwin Hunt, and loving mother of Caroline E. Mahony, and loving grandmother of Ena (deceased), Mollie (deceased), Jack, Keith, Kathleen, Eric, Colin (A.I.F.), aged 83 years.—At peace.6 

Citations

  1. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888 "listed as MAYER."
  2. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  3. [S4] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Great War Index Victoria 1914-1920.
  4. [S22] Victorian Government. BDM Index Victoria (online) "[par MEYER William & Ernestine RAYMOND] - Place of birth HARKAWAY."
  5. [S11] Newspaper - The Argus (Melbourne, Vic.), 22 Jun 1945, p2.
  6. [S11] Newspaper - The Argus (Melbourne, Vic.), 23 Jun 1945, p2.
Last Edited14 Jun 2019

Samuel Gottfried Beer

M, #16145, b. 1820, d. 9 May 1854
Birth*1820 Havel Goldberg, Silesia, Germany.1 
Marriage*3 Nov 1845 Spouse: Ernestine Reimann. Krotoschin Stadt, Posen, Prussia-Germany, Samuel Gottfried Beer (Age 25) & Ernstine Riemann (Age 18.)2
 
(Migrant) Migration/Travelabt 1847 Sailing with Ernestine Beer Emma Bertha Christina Beer to Adelaide, SA, Australia. Ship Alfred together with Samuel's parents John Gottfried BEER & Anna Rosina SELVREIBRAU aged 68+69.3
 
Death*9 May 1854 Berwick, VIC, Australia, died from an accident in the Parish of Berwick.4 

Family

Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Children 1.Emma Bertha Christina Beer+ b. 1847, d. 6 Sep 1874
 2.Johann Solomon Beer b. 13 Mar 1849, d. 15 Jun 1852
 3.Bertha Emma Caroline Beer+ b. 18 Jun 1850, d. 25 Jul 1925
 4.Karl Heinrich Beer b. 27 Jun 1851, d. 1853
 5.Martha Mary Beer+ b. 1854, d. 12 Nov 1935

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree.
  2. [S65] Ancestry - various indices, Germany, Select Marriages, 1558-1929
    Samuel Gottfried Beer, Age: 25, Father: Johann Gottfried Beer, Spouse: Ernstine Riemann,
    Ernstine Riemann, Age: 18, Father: Philipp Riemann, Spouse: Samuel Gottfried Beer, Marriage Date: 3. Nov 1845 (3 Nov 1845), Marriage Place: Evangelisch, Krotoschin Stadt, Posen, Prussia.
  3. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, The Passenger ship "Alfred" was a 3 masted sailing ship, built in Lulea, Sweden, in 1841 and named Australia. She was purchased from Liliewalch of Stockholm on the 30th November 1844, by J.C. Godeffroy & Sohn of Hamberg, and renamed Alfred. She was 562 tons and 635 tons gross. Her captain was H.E. Decker from Hamburg.
    She sailed from Hamburg on the 20th August 1848 with 275 passengers on board, arriving at Rio de Janeiro, South America on the 17th October, and Port Adelaide, South Australia on (2 records say the 6th and 1 other 8th) December 1848.
    The Passengers
    there are 3 entries on the Steerage passenger list:-
    Beer J Godfried 68 (1780) agriculturist from Goldberg, Silesia, Prussia.
    wife Ann Rosina (Selvreibrau) 69 (1779)
    Beer Samuel G (son of above) (1827) agricultureist from Freiman, Silesia, Prussia.
    wife Ernstine (Riemann) 20 (1828)
    Emma Bertha Christine (1847)
    Beer Wiliiam (son of above) agriculturist from Prussia.
    Wife Henrietia nee Kortzertzky (1825)
    daughter Mary Grace (1845)
    daughter Mathilde Pauline (1847).
    All info from Wikipedia.org and The National Archives of Australia and Germany
    Posted 03 Mar 2014 by Fritz Pütz.
  4. [S81] Land Records & Parish Maps ; PROV (Public Records Office Victoria). Application 7502.
Last Edited5 Mar 2022

Emma Bertha Christina Beer

F, #16146, b. 1847, d. 6 Sep 1874
Father*Samuel Gottfried Beer b. 1820, d. 9 May 1854
Mother*Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Married NameBox.1 
Married NameScott. 
(Migrant) Migration/Travelabt 1847 Sailing with Samuel Gottfried Beer Ernestine Beer to Adelaide, SA, Australia. Ship Alfred together with Samuel's parents John Gottfried BEER & Anna Rosina SELVREIBRAU aged 68+69
infant.2 
Birth*1847 Germany. 
Marriage*16 Mar 1866 Spouse: William Henry Scott. Lutheran Church, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, #M969.1
 
Marriage*16 Mar 1867 Spouse: Charles Adolphus Box. Sale, VIC, Australia.3
 
Widow18 Mar 1867Emma Bertha Christina Beer became a widow upon the death of her husband William Henry Scott.4 
Death*6 Sep 1874 Harkaway, VIC, Australia, #D7068 (Age 27) died of strangulation of intestines & a fever of typhoid character, of which she had been suffering for six weeks. She was last seen by Dr Elmes two days before her death.1

Family

Charles Adolphus Box b. 1843, d. 26 Oct 1878
Children 1.Caroline Emma Ernstine Box+ b. 10 Feb 1870, d. 29 Jun 1941
 2.Emma Bertha Martha Box+ b. 30 May 1872, d. 1902
 3.Ernestine Anna Box+ b. Mar 1874, d. 25 Mar 1950

Citations

  1. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  2. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, The Passenger ship "Alfred" was a 3 masted sailing ship, built in Lulea, Sweden, in 1841 and named Australia. She was purchased from Liliewalch of Stockholm on the 30th November 1844, by J.C. Godeffroy & Sohn of Hamberg, and renamed Alfred. She was 562 tons and 635 tons gross. Her captain was H.E. Decker from Hamburg.
    She sailed from Hamburg on the 20th August 1848 with 275 passengers on board, arriving at Rio de Janeiro, South America on the 17th October, and Port Adelaide, South Australia on (2 records say the 6th and 1 other 8th) December 1848.
    The Passengers
    there are 3 entries on the Steerage passenger list:-
    Beer J Godfried 68 (1780) agriculturist from Goldberg, Silesia, Prussia.
    wife Ann Rosina (Selvreibrau) 69 (1779)
    Beer Samuel G (son of above) (1827) agricultureist from Freiman, Silesia, Prussia.
    wife Ernstine (Riemann) 20 (1828)
    Emma Bertha Christine (1847)
    Beer Wiliiam (son of above) agriculturist from Prussia.
    Wife Henrietia nee Kortzertzky (1825)
    daughter Mary Grace (1845)
    daughter Mathilde Pauline (1847).
    All info from Wikipedia.org and The National Archives of Australia and Germany
    Posted 03 Mar 2014 by Fritz Pütz.
  3. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888 "on second daughter's birth certificate."
  4. [S7] Registry of NSW Births Deaths and Marriages "as William H SCOTT."
Last Edited12 Jun 2019

Johann Solomon Beer

M, #16147, b. 13 Mar 1849, d. 15 Jun 1852
Father*Samuel Gottfried Beer b. 1820, d. 9 May 1854
Mother*Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Birth*13 Mar 1849 Bethanien (Bethany), SA, Australia.1 
Death*15 Jun 1852 SA, Australia.1 

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, jeremy platt.
Last Edited11 Jun 2019

Bertha Emma Caroline Beer

F, #16148, b. 18 Jun 1850, d. 25 Jul 1925
Father*Samuel Gottfried Beer b. 1820, d. 9 May 1854
Mother*Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Married NameSmartt. 
Birth*18 Jun 1850 Bethanien (Bethany), SA, Australia.1 
Marriage*13 Aug 1867 Spouse: Henry Augustus Smartt. Harkaway, VIC, Australia.2
 
Widow22 Jan 1913Bertha Emma Caroline Beer became a widow upon the death of her husband Henry Augustus Smartt.2 
Death*25 Jul 1925 Melbourne East, VIC, Australia, #D10412 (Age 75) - as SMARTT.3 

Family

Henry Augustus Smartt b. 13 Feb 1829, d. 22 Jan 1913
Children 1.Arthur Samuel Henry Smartt b. 1868
 2.Alexander William Smartt b. 21 Feb 1877, d. 18 Jun 1964

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree.
  2. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, dosborn112.
  3. [S5] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Death Index Victoria 1921-1985 "listed as SMART."
Last Edited11 Jun 2019

Karl Heinrich Beer

M, #16149, b. 27 Jun 1851, d. 1853
Father*Samuel Gottfried Beer b. 1820, d. 9 May 1854
Mother*Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Birth*27 Jun 1851 SA, Australia.1 
Death*1853 SA, Australia.1 

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, jeremy platt.
Last Edited11 Jun 2019

Martha Mary Beer

F, #16150, b. 1854, d. 12 Nov 1935
Father*Samuel Gottfried Beer b. 1820, d. 9 May 1854
Mother*Ernestine Reimann b. 7 Feb 1827, d. 30 Sep 1908
Married NameKoenig.1 
Birth*1854 Bethanien (Bethany), SA, Australia. 
Marriage*1873 Spouse: Henry Benjamin Koenig. VIC, Australia, #M3489.1
 
Residence1916 PO Linden, Transvaal, South Africa. 
Death*12 Nov 1935 Royal Park, VIC, Australia, #D9986/1935 (Age 81) (par Samuel BEER & Ernestina RIEMAN) - as Martha Mary KOENIG.2 
Death-Notice*13 Nov 1935KOENIG. — On the 12th November, at Melbourne, Martha Mary, loved wife of the late Henry, and loving father of Adolphus and Raymond. At rest.3 

Newspaper-Articles

  • 5 Apr 1865: INDECENT ASSAULT. John Holliman was charged, on on information containing four counts, with indecently assaulting, and assaulting with intent, two girls, named Martha Beer and Martha Koeing, of the respective ages of nine and five years.
    The prisoner pleaded Not Guilty, and was defended by Mr F. L. Smyth, who took the preliminary objection that the prisoner ought to be tried on each offence separately, and that a number of them, distinct in themselves, ought not to be grouped under one indictment. In support of the view of the case, he quoted from "Archbold on Evidence."
    The Crown Prosecutor replied ; and, after some discussion, his Honor overruled the objection. The offence on the child Martha Beer was alleged to have been committed on the 20th September, 1863, and that on Koeing on the 5th December last.
    The two children detailed the nature of the offence, which was committed in a shed attached or near to the residence of Gustave Koeing, in whose employment the prisoner was as an occasional laborer ; Koeing being a small farmer residing near Berwick, in the Dandenong district. The case for the Crown, however, mainly rested on the evidence of the mother of the girl Beer, William Meyer, the child's step-father, and Gustave Koeing, father of Martha Koeing, who all deposed to the prisoner making certain confessions to the effect that he had wronged the children, but not so badly as the neighbors said of him.
    The witnesses were all German, and, with the exception of Gustave Koeing, had to be examined through an interpreter, an office which was efficiently filled by Detective Berliner. The evidence was of a very conflicting nature, that of Koeing being particularly so, his eccentric manner keeping the court in a continual roar. The medical testimony of Dr. Charles Phillips, of Dandenong, was to the effect that the children had been injured, but he was not prepared to say whether the violence was accidental or otherwise.
    Mr F. L. Smyth addressed the jury, and dwelt at length on the discrepancy of the evidence, and also urged that the prisoner had been intimidated, by threats of being thrown out of employment, to confess to a crime which there was no reason to believe he had ever committed.
    His Honor carefully summed up, and after a brief absence the jury returned into court with a verdict finding the prisoner guilty of having indicently assaulted Martha Beer, and not guilty on the other counts. The prisoner was remanded for sentence, and the court then adjourned until ten o'clock the following morning. Johanna Martha Koenig4

Citations

  1. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  2. [S28] Victorian Government. BDM Index Victoria (Deaths) (online) "#D9986/1935 (Age 81) (par Samuel BEER & Ernestina RIEMAN) - as Martha Mary KOENIG, Death registered at Royal Park, Australia."
  3. [S16] Newspaper - The Age (Melbourne, Vic.), Wed 13 Nov 1935, p1
    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/203899173
  4. [S16] Newspaper - The Age (Melbourne, Vic.), 5 Apr 1865, p7.
Last Edited5 Mar 2022

William Henry Scott

M, #16151, b. abt 1840, d. 18 Mar 1867
William Henry SCOTT
in Sydney Sportsman, 26 Jul 1905, p3
Birth*abt 1840 Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England.1 
Marriage*16 Oct 1864 Spouse: Annie Ramsden. Ipswich or Brisbane, QLD, Australia, #M1864/C/248.2
 
Marriage*16 Mar 1866 Spouse: Emma Bertha Christina Beer. Lutheran Church, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, #M969.3
 
Death*18 Mar 1867 Darlinghurst Gaol, Sydney, NSW, Australia, #D483/1867 (Age 28) - executed at Darlinghurst Gaol.4 
Burial*18 Mar 1867 Camperdown Cemetery, Newtown, Sydney, NSW, Australia, burial at Camperdown Cemetery on the same day as execution.5 

Newspaper-Articles

  • 11 Oct 1866: CENTRAL POLICE COURT. WEDNESDAY.
    Before their worships the Police Magistrate, Messrs. Pinhey, Chapman, and Raper.
    Of twelve prisoners brought before the Court, three were discharged, and one was remanded.
    William Henry Scott, twenty-nine, described as a butcher, was charged with the murder of the woman whose remains were on the 13th ultimo found on a piece of waste land off Sussex-street, in this city. Inspector Road deposed that about 11 o'clock, last night, the prisoner was brought to the Central Police Station, by Constable Hogan, and was shortly afterwards charged, in his (Mr. Read's) presence and by his directions, with killing and murdering the female, name unknown, a portion of whose remains were found on a piece of waste ground off Sussex-street, in this city, on the 15th day of September last ; in reply to the charge prisoner said, "You surprise me" and subsequently made a statement which he (the witness) wished to reserve for a time. The prisoner was thereupon remanded until this day week.6
  • 18 Oct 1866: CENTRAL POLICE COURT. WEDNESDAY.
    BEFORE their Worships the Police Magistrate and Mr. Pinhey.
    MURDER. On Wednesday last William Henry Scott, 29, by trade a butcher, was brought before the Court by inspector Read, charged with having at Sydney, in or about the month of August last, murdered a female, name unknown, the remains of whom were, on the 15th September, found on a waste piece of land off Sussex street. No evidence was taken beyond the fact of his apprehension, and that he denied the charge. He was then remanded until this morning.
    The first witness called was John M'Lerie, Inspector General of Police, who being sworn produced the proceedings of an inquest held on 17th September, and by adjournment continued until 2nd October current, before the Coroner, on the remains of a female, name unknown, which on the 15th September were found near Barker's Mill, Sussex street; the finding of the jury being "That a certain person or persons, to said jurors unknown, in or about the month of August last past, the said female to the jurors aforesaid unknown, feloniously wilfully and of his or their malice aforethought did kill and murder, against the peace of our Lady the Queen her crown and dignity;" and deposed that after the inquest certain articles which had been used thereat as exhibits were sent to my office, a piece of unbleached calico, a human skull, two joints of the vertebrae, and a portion of human hair; from circumstances which came to my knowledge in the early part of last week I went to a house at the south end of Sussex street, and requested the landlady to show me into the cellar, which she did; in that cellar I saw some articles of bedding, crockery, and other household utensils, and a kind of tent or tarpaulin, and amongst them were these two pieces of calico, the body of a female dress, and this axe; the landlady handed to me this butcher's steel, I had the articles produced conveyed to my office; after I had examined them with the aid of a magnifier, and in consequence of other facts which came to my knowledge, at 4 pm, of that day (Tuesday), directed Inspector Reid in charge of the Sydney police, to cause a man calling himself Scott, a journeyman butcher, and lately in the employ of Mr Rice, George-street North, to be found immediately by the police if in the city, and if not to ascertain where he was gone; in the course of that night Mr Read reported to me that the man had been apprehended and charged with the wilful murder of a female, name unknown; on the axe I discovered some spots of blood - two on the handle and three on the head -and the handle, near the head, appears to have been scraped.
    By Mr Thompson: I was not present at the inquest nor am I an officer of the Coroner 's Court; the depositions were handed to me by the Secretary of the Crown Law office.
    George Read, Inspector in charge of the police force in the city and district of Sydney, was recalled, and deposed: Immediately after the prisoner was brought to the police station on Tuesday, the 9th, he said. 'What am I brought here for? 'I said, "You are here charged with the wilful murder of your wife', he answered, ' My wife is in Melbourne; I was living with a woman in Sussex street, we quarrelled, and she went away 'I said 'We should like to find the woman you were living with in Sussex street, and if you will answer a few questions that I will put to you, you may assist us in doing so; but understand that you need not answer my questions unless you wish, as what you say will have to be reported in evidence, and may go against you;" he then said, in reply to my questions and speaking of the woman he had lived with in Sussex-street - "I do not know anyone that is acquainted with her - I do not know anyone who knows her - I do not know where she came from - I never asked her any such question - I first saw her near M'Carroll's butcher's shop in Pitt street, where I got into conversation with her, and we took a walk round the Racecourse; I saw her again shortly afterwards and said 'I have got a place in Sussex-street and you had better come and stay with me.' She did so. I did not intent to stay with her long, as I expected my wife up from Melbourne; I never saw her speak to any one but to a Mrs Orr, of Sussex street; we were in Mrs Orr's one night and quarrelled, we quarrelled as we were going in at our own door; I went away to the public house at the corner of George-street, and when I came back she was leaving with her box; this was about 7 o'clock in the evening; I am sure it was about 7 o'clock; I do not know whether anyone saw her going away; I have never seen her since; I do not know where she is now; I have never made inquiries about her; I should think she was about 25 or 26, about my own height, had a large head and a thin nose, her hair was black or nearly so; I lived with her three or four months ago, in a lane by the Haymarket; I always called her Annie; I never asked her name; I quarrelled with her because she was dirty; as the prisoner was being placed in the cell he said "I do not like being there alone - I should like to have a man with me if you can spare one," the greater part of what I have repeated as his statement was said by him before he was charged, as stated in my previous deposition on the 9th October; in consequence of something I heard I spoke to him after his remand on Wednesday the 10th , I said, "Do not answer any of the questions I am going to put to you unless you wish as what you say may go against you;' in answer to questions he said "I know a female named Reynolds - she is dead, I believe she died about twelve months ago, she was acquainted with the woman I was living with in Sussex-street; I met the woman I was living with in Sussex street in Queensland, about two years ago; she was my wife," he then voluntarily said "I was not exactly married to her; I used to visit her where she was living, we went to live in a tent together; I took her out one day and put a ring on her finger, and people believed that we were married," it is possible that he said something more than I have stated, but if so, I am unable to recall it to mind.
    By Mr Thompson I received him in custody about 11 o'clock at night, he was sober, he asked several times for water before he was locked up, he said he had had some brandy which had made him thirsty; I have ascertained that a great deal of what he told me is untrue, he did not seem to treat the charge with contempt, but rather seemed to be much affected.
    Mr M'Lerie said that a legal gentleman was engaged on behalf of the Crown to conduct this prosecution, but as he would not be able to attend this Court before Friday he (Mr M'Lerie) asked that prisoner might be remanded until Friday.
    Remanded until Friday.
    The precincts of the Court, and the Court itself, were densely crowded at an early hour by persons desirous of seeing the prisoner and of hearing the evidence, but before the prisoner was brought up the Court was cleared, and those persons only were admitted (excepting of oourse magistrates, and persons officially connected with the Court) who had sought and obtained tickets authorising the police to admit them.7
  • 20 Oct 1866: CENTRAL POLICE COURT. FRIDAY, THE MURDER CASE.
    Before their Worships the Police Magistrate, and Mr Pinhey.
    James Kirkpatrick, 11 years, going to school and church, and knows his prayers deposed; I live with my father, in Sussex street, who is an ironmoulder; one Tuesday, when I found some ribs which I thought were ribs of a goat, and on the following Saturday, when going on a message for my father, I found a human head, in an open space behind Barker's Mills, where was a rubbish heap of wool and refuse from the cloth factory; my little dog drew my attention to the heap by scratching a hole, when I saw a big bone, which I kicked over, and then I saw that it was the head of a human being, severed from the body; the face was down when I kicked the bone; when the dog scratched up the head it was covered with woolly refuse from the factory; it was not very deep down; the ribs I saw on Tuesday were yet there, but were distant several feet from the spot where first I saw them; I found the head at the place where on the previous Tuesday I saw the ribs, I went for my father, showed him the head, and remained with it while he went for the police; I was examined at the inquest; the remains were at the inquest in the state in which I found them; I had been in the habit of passing the spot, and three or four times previously noticed my dog scratching on the rubbish heap - the first time three or four days before the Tuesday on which I saw the ribs; they were partly covered when I first saw them.
    By Mr Thompson; I have had no conversation on this subject but with my father and mother since the inquest; people residing in the neighbourhood of Barker's Mills threw rubbish every day, as well as from the cloth factory, on the piece of land where I found the ribs and head.
    By Mr Windeyer; I saw some hair on the skull; my father came to the place in about ten minutes after I found it; it was in the same state then as when I found it.
    By Mr Thompson; There was no hair on the top of the head, but at the back and at the sides.
    By the Bench; The hair was of a dark brown colour. William Kirkpatrick, residing in Sussex-street, about 150 yards from Barker s Mills, ironmoulder, deposed I recollect on Saturday, 15th September, my son telling me something, in consequence of which I went to a piece of spare ground behind the back gate of Barker's Mills, where he pointed out to me the head of a female, and where on examination also I found the upper part of a body, from the neck to about the waist; I left my son there while I informed the police of the circumstance; senior-sergeant Waters and another policeman returned with me to the place, and took possession of the head and other remains, which were then in the same state as when they were first pointed out to me by my son; the head and trunk were about eight feet apart and the trunk being upon the heap or earth; the heap consisted of ashes from the mill and refuse from the cloth factory; no miscellaneous rubbish from carts in the streets have been thrown there for five or six months; I did not notice that the skull had been partially burned - it might have been, I did not observe anything indicative of there having been a fire at that place, I have often seen hot ashes from the mill put down near where the body was found.
    By Mr Thompson; The same head and remains I afterwards saw at the dead-house on the occasion of an inquest.
    By Mr Windeyer; And Dr Renwick saw and examined the head and remains of which I have been speaking.
    By the Police Magistrate; I saw some hair on the head, and some flesh, and something like a cut on the forehead; the nose was rather sharp, I cannot say that it was very long.
    George Waters, senior-sergeant of police, deposed; In consequence of information received from the last witness, I, on the 15th September, proceeded to a piece of waste ground at the rear of Barker's mills, where I found his son, they pointed out to me the head of a female and a portion of a body, which were lying some feet apart; round the lower portion of the trunk I found the piece of rag produced (marked B) the centre part of which adhered to the trunk, it was dirty and covered with blood, the trunk lay upon a heap of rubbish from the cloth factory , the rag is what is called twilled calico, and appears to be a portion of a woman's chemise, one side of which has been cut with a knife, I produce also other pieces of cloth, marked C and D, the material of which is similar to that of the piece marked B; I had the remains placed in a shell and removed to the dead house at the Benevolent Asylum, I observed some dark brown hair on the skull; when I first saw the skull the tongue had swollen and protruded, and as I did not interfere with the position of the lips I did not observe the teeth, I noticed a cut over the right eye, at the inquest on Monday, I observed that one tooth was wanting at the left side of the upper jaw, no arms were with the trunks, and both then and since I have searched in vain for the arms or any other portion of the body, the tip of the nose either had been broken or was wanting, the nose was very prominent in the upper portion, and judging from what remained I should say that it had been a long thin nose; at the close of the inquest I received from Dr Renwick the skull I now produce (exhibit E), which is the skull spoken to by Dr Renwick at the inquest, and which is in the same state as when I received it, I also received from Dr Renwick, and now produce (exhibit F ), a portion of hair; after prisoner's apprehension I received information on which I proceeded to Newland's public-house, Lower George street, near the Queen's Wharf, where I received from Mr. Newland the head and the foot of an iron bedstead, now in possession of the police, a tin box (exhibit G), containing a woman's bonnet, a cap and head-dress, two black feathers, five collars (one with brooch attached), a piece of plaid, seven white handkerchiefs (one marked S. B. Rowe, and an other Caroline Rhodes) a purse (marked Samuel Ramsden), ten men's collars, pair sugar tongs, some gunpowder in a handkerchief, a box of percussion-caps, a pair of lace sleeves, two bead collars, a string of small red beads of sufficient length to go several times round the neck, two empty scent bottles, a pair of cuffs, two black silk tassels two bits of ribbon, and a large cotton handkerchief; I also received of Newland a wooden box (exhibit H), containing three brooches, one collar, a belt, packages of needles, some pieces of sown calico and flannel (marked as exhibit I), and a variety of glass and china; on the night of prisoner's apprehension he said that Annie had three boxes, one of which she took with her, another was at his lodging, Mr Artlett's, and the third was at Newland's; I took the boxes to him at the lock-up , I asked him if this (a tin box) were the box he alluded as being at Newland's, it was then locked; he said "it contains a lady's bonnet, but I do not know what else," I opened the box and took out the contents in his presence, he made a remark respecting it, but I do not remember whether before or after I opened it, that whatever it contained belonged to Annie, the woman he lived with; the white wooden box I opened with a screw driver, and took out the contents, which he said belonged to him; and on the lid is written, in pencil, "W H. Scott, from Melbourne to Sydney," in another place on the lid is written" W. H. Scott;" after this, in consequence of information, I went to the house of Mrs Orr, in Sussex-street; from Mr Linsley, in Mrs Orr's presence, I received the side and bottom of an iron bedstead, a mattress, and some cooking utensils, and a large piece of canvas, a piece cut out from which (exhibit J) I produce; I see it is stained, apparently with blood; I showed it to Dr Renwick, who returned it to me; the mattress is also stained, with what I cannot say, but I cut out the piece and handed it to Dr Renwick; the mattress is in the possession of the police; last Wednesday (17th October) I received from Mrs Smith, of Sussex street, a small bottle of a liquid, labelled chloroform, which I produce (exhibit K) in the state in which I received it.
    By Mr Thompson; I have no knowledge of the prisoner before this charge; I was present when the charge was entered; I cannot say what induced him to enter into conversation with me at the lock-up, I asked him no questions to open up a conversation.
    John M'Lerie, Inspector-General of Police, recalled; The pieces of cloth marked C and D, and this body of a female's dress (exhibit L) I found in the cellar of Mrs Orr's house, Susses- street.
    Senior sergeant Taylor deposed; In consequence of information received I proceeded on the night of Tuesday, the 9th October, to the residence of Mr Artlett Rushcutter's Bay, and there found in Mr. Artlett's presence the tin or iron box (exhibit M) produced, on the top of which the name of Scott is scratched; it was locked; I brought it to the Central Police Station, where prisoner was; I asked him if he lived at Mr Artlett's Rushcutters Bay and he said "I do," I showed him the box, and he claimed it as his property; he said "It belongs to a woman I was living with in Sussex-street," I said "Who is the woman - what is her name?" he replied "I do not know any name except Annie - I never knew her by any other name," I opened the box and took out the contents enumerated in the list (exhibit N) produced; I said, "Is that your property?" showing him, among other articles, a poker, the head of a pick, a broken lamp, and a female's dress; he did not immediately reply, but said that "they (the things named) are not mine, I do not know how they came there, unless some one put them there; the box was left open in my room;" the key with which I opened the box was handed to me at the station, and, as I understood, was found upon him when brought to the station; he said, "all the other articles are mine;" in the pocket of a pair of trousers which was in the box I found this letter (exhibit O) in an envelope addressed "Mr Henry Scott, shopman, care of Mr T Rice butcher, Lower George Street, Sydney, New South Wales," and is stamped, bearing the postmark of Harkaway, Berwick, Melbourne, and Sydney; I showed prisoner the letter, and he said "it is a letter I received from my wife at Melbourne," it is dated "Harkaway, 12th September, 1866," and is signed "Your affectionate wife Emma Scott," I also found in the box this letter (exhibit P), dated "Sydney, October 7, Sunday, 1866," and addressed to "Mr. W. Meyer, Harkaway, Berwick, Victoria," and he said "That is an answer to the letter I received from my wife, but I had not posted it;" he said that the letter is in his handwriting; [the letter intimates his intention shortly to proceed to Melbourne, but if she preferred coming to Sydney he would send her money for that purpose, but advised her, as he did not intend to remain in Sydney very long, not to bring her boxes.]
    I found also a pawnticket (exhibit Q), dated 22nd September, 1866, for twenty-three pieces, 30s, pawned with Henry D James, which I showed to him; I said, "Do you see this?" He said, "Yes that is some things I got some money on after she went away;" next day I went to James's pawn-office, and received from him a bundle of wearing apparel, containing the articles enumerated in the list (exhibit R) produced, among them is a piece of twilled calico and a pillow slip (exhibit S) made of the same material; in the iron box found at Artlett's I found a pillow slip (exhibit T), made of calico resembling the slip and the piece of calico found at James's; I showed to prisoner the articles found at James's pawn-office, and said "Do you see these?" He replied, "Yes, they belong to Annie'; in the bundle was a piece of grey blanket (exhibit U), which was stained; Dr Renwick cut out the stained portion, and has it in his possession; I found in the box a list of female wearing apparel, with prices marked against them; in the box was also a butcher's knife and a small pocket pistol, into the barrel of which something appears to have been driven; the iron box found at Artlett's appears to have been recently painted blue, over a kind of buff or oak colour, inside as well as out; the smell of paint is quite fresh on opening the box; on last Wednesday afternoon I went to Mrs. Smith's, Sussex-street, and received from her the two blankets (exhibit V) produced; one is blue and the other brown; the brown blanket is stained in two places, which were cut out by Dr. Renwick in my presence; to day I showed prisoner the blankets and asked him if they are the blankets he had at Mrs Smith's; he replied "Yes they are mine;" last Tuesday and Wednesday I examined an upstairs front room of the house in Sussex-street, in which prisoner lived, and on the floor were several marks of blood; some of which I removed by scraping and gave the scrapings to Dr Renwick; I observed on Monday a dark mark on the floor of the front room down stairs, near the street door, about the size of the palm of a man's hand; I wetted it with water, and as it dried the colour became of a darker hue.
    By Mr Thompson; The prison was cautioned but not by me respecting the answers he gave to the questions put to him.
    At this point the examination was adjourned until Monday.
    [At the usual adjournment of the Court for luncheon their Worships with a view to the better apprehension of the evidence proceeded to and viewed the house in Sussex-street in which the murder is supposed to have been committed, the house (also in Sussex-street) to which prisoner subsequently removed, and the site where the remains were found.]8
  • 23 Oct 1866: CENTRAL POLICE COURT. Monday.
    BEFORE their Worships the Police Magistrate and Mr Pinhey.
    THE MURDER CASE RESUMED
    George Read, inspector of the Sydney Police, was recalled by Mr Windeyer, and further deposed as follows; In consequence of information received, I went between 9 and 10 o'clock on Saturday pm to the house of a Mrs Marshall, in Phillip street, and received from her a trunk of clothing, which I now produce; it was in a back kitchen, and tied up with rope; this morning I showed it to prisoner, and told him where I found it; he made no reply; I hand in a list (exhibit W) of the articles of clothing contained in the trunk, besides which it contained a variety of small articles, such as thimbles, thread, remnants of ribbons and dress pieces, buttons, &c; I compared two chemises and two pairs of women's drawers mentioned in this list, with this piece of twilled calico marked B and they appear to be of the same material, and, so far as I can judge, the style of sewing is the same in every instance, the pieces let into the sides of the chemises are of similar form, and are nearly of the same size as the pieces let into exhibit B.
    By Mr Thompson; I did not ask prisoner if this box belonged to him.
    Janet Orr deposed; I am a widow, and reside in Sussex-street, near its junction with George street; I saw prisoner first on the evening of Sunday, the 5th August; he called about about a house I had to let; I gave him the key to look at the house, when he returned; between my residence and the house of which he got the key are two other houses - Mr. Linsley's residence and his store; he said that the house would suit him, and that he would take it; I told him I expected a deposit of half a-week's rent; he said that his name was Scott, that he would bring it the next evening; on Monday night he brought the 7s., and asked for the key; he said "My wife is coming up from Melbourne on Saturday", I kept the key, having to remove a grate from one of the fireplaces; on Wednesday morning, the 8th August, I removed some (either two or three) boxes from Linsley's into my own house, and which boxes prisoner the same evening removed into the house he had taken of me; the box marked H is one of those boxes; on the following Monday week (August 20th) a woman paid me the rent; she was a very good looking woman and very pleasant; she was a tall, well made woman, she had a high ridged very well shaped nose, hollow cheeks, dark brown hair, and wanted one of her front teeth; she frequently put her hand to her mouth, as if to hide the loss of her tooth; she wore a hat, and whenever I afterwards saw her, she wore a hat, but I saw her very seldom; when she paid me the rent on the 20th August, she said, in the course of conversation, that she wondered at his taking such a large house for her; she did not say where she came from; from her speech and manner I took her to be a native of Scotland; about a week afterward I saw her standing at the door of the house I let to the prisoner, and I stood and spoke to her; she said that the house was so large - cellars below and rooms above -that she felt afraid, and that she every night waited at the door until her husband came home; in answer to my question she said that she came from Yorkshire; after this she once or twice paid the rent, and I think that on another occasion she and prisoner came together; a few days after seeing her at the door she left the key with me when she went out in the morning, calling for it in the evening; she said that the house was too large for them, and asked me to let it, and in consequence I took several persons to view the premises; about 10 o'clock Tuesday night, the 4th September, returning home from Mr Linsley s, where I had passed the evening, my daughter told me something about prisoner and his wife; between 9 and 10 o'clock on the next night, Wednesday, the 5th September, prisoner came to my house for the key, and the woman was behind him at my gate; I asked them, and they both came into my house and sat down, and had some wine with me; they sat until nearly 12 o'clock; I asked them, among other things, how long they had been married, when she looked at him, and he replied, "About four years," and in the course of conversation it was said, but by which of them I do not recollect, that they met at Brisbane and were married there; nothing was said by either about having been at Melbourne; he said that he went to England, and that during his absence she was at a place of service, and she said that she was nearly losing the place because they wanted a single women, but that the person, a Miss Grant, agreed to take her on his representation that he, her husband, was about to proceed to England; he called her Annie; she appeared to be very good - tempered, and laughed off several unkind sayings by prisoner, who, among other things, said that she was dirty and lazy; nothing was said by either that night about leaving the house; I never saw her after that night, nor was the key left with me again; about two nights after that prisoner called alone, between 8* and 9 o'clock, and inquired whether I had let the house; I said "How could I let the house while you have the key?" I said "Are you coming in-where is she?" he replied "O, she is gone"; I believe, but I cannot be sure, that I asked if she had left him; he did not offer me the key of the house; after that evening I took a person who wished to see the house to look in at the lower window; all the things - bedding and boxes - were huddled together on one side of the room; I saw a box like exhibit M, only that it was of a brownish colour, resembling wood; this was on either Friday or Saturday morning; about dark on the evening of Sunday, the 9th September prisoner came to my house; I said, "Where is your wife or some such words, and he replied "She is somewhere about Redfern;" I asked him when he would take away his things that I might let the house; he said he did not know where to take them, I said that he might put them in my cellar, where they would be quite safe; he said, " Can I do it now?" I said, "Not on Sunday night;" he said that he would try and come in the morning and remove them; about 6 o'clock on Monday morning he came; I showed him the cellar and he put some things into it; I afterward heard him say some thing about a broom to sweep out the house; I went to the house, thinking that he had gone away without paying the rent and found him stooping engaged in wiping - I think with a cloth - some spots on the floor just inside the street door, which was open about twelve inches; the part of the floor where he was wiping was about a foot from the door, and was just visible from the opening of the door; the things prisoner left in my cellar were given by Mr Linely in my presence to senior sergeant Waters; after breakfast on the 10th he brought me the key, paid me the rent, told me that he had got the sack for being away that morning and gave me a butcher's steel to take care of for him; he said that he would not take £5 for the steel; I afterwards gave it to Mr M'Lerie; this axe (produced) was among the things found by Mr M'Lerie in the cellar; I did not see prisoner put the axe nor any thing in the cellar; on that day (September 10), when I inquired about his wife, he said that he had made a mistake in marrying her - that he thought she was a clean industrious girl, but found that she was not; the last time I saw him was on Monday the 17th September, when he said that as he was going to the diggings he wanted all the money that he could get, and asked me to forego the week's rent that he owed me; on recollection I think it was on the 17th September that I asked him whether he had seen his wife lately, and that he replied "Oh she is at Redfern somewhere", and that he told me that he had made a mistake in marrying; he had a bundle, which he said contained trousers he was taking to be washed , and that introduced his complaint of his wife being so dirty and idle that she would neither wash nor mend his clothes; "These" he said, "I am going to wash at Uhde's ,"; on either the Friday or the Sunday night that he asked whether I had let the house, he said, "I don't sleep there," he did not say how or when his wife left him; there are in the house two apartments below the level of the street, two on the ground floor, and two above, he had no furniture in the house, nor anything but boxes to sit upon; I now recollect that it was I, and not my daughter who gave the key to prisoner on Tuesday night, the 4th September and he said that he and his wife had sat for an hour on the step of their own door listening to the music at Mr Linsley's.
    By the Police Magistrate; I noticed that the woman's cheek bones were rather high, I did not notice that her forehead was wrinkled or whether she had either a mole or a scar upon her face; the iron box was not among the things he brought to my house, he did not appear to have been drinking on the Wednesday night that he and she were in my house together.
    By Mr Pinhey; The hat she wore was a dark hat, I do not remember how it was trimmed, nor whether she wore a feather , she was a little taller than I am, I should think her age was a little over 30; I last saw the woman on Wednesday; on the Monday following prisoner gave me the key, and on the next Monday (September 17th), last saw the prisoner, when he told me he was going to the diggings.
    Mary Jane Orr, daughter of the last witness deposed - I recollect my mother letting the house in which the prisoner afterwards lived; I first saw prisoner on Wednesday, 8th August when he brought two white wooden boxes to our house; the box marked H is like one of them; when he took them away he said he was taking them to the house my mother had let to him; on the Monday night after that I saw a woman at the house; I had been out and when on the way home she was standing at the door; she was a tall person, had a rather large nose, I noticed that she had a tooth out from the upper jaw, but cannot say on which side, dark brown hair, I did not notice whether she wore any ornament, such as a necklace or a brooch; I never saw her wear a bonnet; she wore a brown hat with feathers of the same colour; I should know the hat if I were to see it; she generally wore a striped print dress; I saw them once together at our house when they came to pay the rent and again on the night of Wednesday, the 5th September; they came together to our house; on the last occasion, between 9 and 10 o'clock, on my mother's invitation they came in and sat down; Scott, in reply to my mother's question, said that they had been four years married, and that they came from Queensland, but whether he said that they were married in Queensland I do not recollect, he said in the course of conversation that she was lazy and dirty, at which she seemed to be vexed, but endeavoured to laugh it off, she said that she had been on a farm at Queensland; he spoke of her as Annie, I do not think that she was called by any name; I saw and spoke to her the next morning, I was standing at the gate of our house, and she passed, proceeding towards the Haymarket; she said that owing to his being up so late on the previous night I could not get him up to go to his work this morning she had no bundle or box with her; I have not seen her since; I next saw prisoner on the evening of Sunday, the 16th September, when he came to pay the rent he owed; my mamma was out; I asked him, "Have you seen your wife?" I addressed him in that way in consequence of something my mother had toId me; he said "What" and seemed startled at the question , before I asked him where his wife was he told me that he was going to the Lachlan with some more butchers; in answer to my question, "Is your wife going with you? he said "O no, let her sweat," nothing more was said about her; he said he would come again after church time and pay mamma the rent; he came again on Monday night, and brought a stool, which he asked mamma to keep for him; she took it , he stayed a little while, and said among other things that he never had such a cry in his life - that she had given him such a tongue; he may have said such a bad tongue, but I am not sure; I understood that he referred to something that had taken place between them after leaving our house on Wednesday night; I cannot remember what he said to cause that impression on my mind; I was out of the room during a portion of the conversation. Mary Trevillien, wife of Thomas Trevillian, of Sussex street, deposed; I lived in a house of Mrs Orr's two doors from Mr Linsley's store; the house next to the lane, on the model shown to me; I left it on Monday, the 10th September; I recollect a man and a woman living four or five weeks in the house next door, between my house and Mr Linsley's store; I think it was nearly a fortnight before I left that I last saw the woman; I and my husband slept in a back room up stairs, and, the room being too small for our bedstead, we slept on the floor; we were awoke very early one morning, about 1 or 2 o'clock, with a very heavy noise, as of something falling; it shook the floor of my room; the noise was followed by two or three dull sounds as of blows on something on the floor; the blows were not given as rapidly as they might have been but at intervals of perhaps two or three seconds; I next heard a noise as of dragging or scraping on the floor; the noise came from the upstairs back room of the adjoining house; I do not remember that I saw the woman after hearing these noises, but previously had frequently seen her; I cannot say the exact time of these noises, but think it is seven or eight weeks since; I think it was toward the latter end of the week; the woman was a tall slight woman, with a small mouth, and a long Jewish looking nose; I mean that the nose was high at the bridge and fine at the point; I should think her age was 25 to 30; her hair was brown - a light brown - and thin; I did not notice anything remarkable about her teeth; the hair produced (exhibit F) is what I call light brown, and the kind of hair she had; I do not think that I could recognise any clothing that she wore, but I fancy that I have seen her wear a red bead necklace, I spoke of the noise to a person who occupied a part of the house with me; I mean by saying that I fancy that I have seen her wearing red beads, that I am almost sure, but will not positively swear that she wore red beads.
    Ellen, the wife of Andrew Craig, residing in Sussex street deposed; I occupied part of the house with the last witness; a house in Sussex street; I remember Mrs Trevellian telling me of a noise she had heard in the next house early in the morning; before Mrs Trevellian told me of it I had frequently seen a female who lived in the next house and have more than once spoken to her; I have not seen her since Mrs Trevillien told me of the noises she had heard proceeding from that house; about 10 o'clock pm, two or three days prior; I had heard a female in the house crying or sobbing as if in distress; I once saw prisoner in that house.
    The inquiry was adjourned until 2 pm of Wednesday.9
  • 23 Oct 1866: THE SUSSEX-STREET MURDER.
    The Herald, of Saturday, publishes lengthy details of the further examinations of witnesses, on Friday, at the Central police office, Sydney, in the case against William Henry Scott, charged with the murder of the woman whose remains were lately found in Sussex-street, Sydney.
    James Kirkpatrick, a boy, deposed to the finding a portion of the remains of a dead body near Mr. Barker's mill. William Kirkpatrick, father of the previous witness, deposed that from information received from his son, he went to a piece of spare ground, near Barker's mills, and there found the head and upper part of the body of a female. George Waters, senior sergeant of police, also deposed to the finding of the remains, and gave a description of them. Round the lower portion of the trunk of the body he found a piece of cloth similar to pieces he afterwards found in the cellar of Mrs. Orr's house in Sussex-street.
    This witness and senior-sergeant Taylor deposed at great length, and minutely, to numbers of articles of men's and women's clothing, &c., which they had traced and found ; some in two boxes at a public-house in Lower George-street ; some in a box found at Mr. Artlett's, Rushcutter's Bay ; some in a bundle of pawned goods found at James's pawn-office, Sydney. They produced all these articles. The prisoner had told the police he had these boxes at these places (at one of which he had lodged, and at one he had worked), containing partly his own and partly "Annie's" property ; and that after Annie left him he pawned a quantity of her clothing at James's [sic], for 30s. A few of the articles found were stained. From Mrs. Orr, of Sussex-street, the police also obtained parts of an iron bedstead, a mattress, piece of canvas, &c., and a small quantity of chloroform in a bottle. And from Mrs. Smith's, Sussex-street, they obtained two blankets. Most of these articles also prisoner admitted to be either his or "Annie's." Some of them were stained, the police believing some of the stains to be of blood ; and all the stained articles were handed over to Dr. Renwick for examination. To him also the police handed over the scrapings of the floor of the upper room in Sussex-street where prisoner had lived with "Annie," the floor appearing stained with blood.
    The inquiry was then adjourned till Monday.10
  • 25 Oct 1866: CENTRAL POLICE COURT. Wednesday.
    BEFORE their Worships the Police Magistrate and Mr. Pinhey.
    THE MURDER CASE.
    William Henry Scott was brought up, pursuant to remand.
    Fanny Smith deposed : I am the wife of William Smith, residing in Sussex-street, in a house facing the back of two houses belonging to Mrs, Orr ; the model produced correctly represents the premises; I almost daily saw a woman who resided in the southern house, that next to Mr. Linsley's store ; the first week the house was occupied the woman was not there, but on the following week, and almost daily until about six weeks ago, I saw her every day ; the last time I saw her was on a Monday morning, when she was washing a pair of trousers at a tap in the lane, common to several houses; Mrs. Hayes was assisting her ; I know a Mrs. Craig; it was about a week before Mrs. Criag left that I saw the female and Mrs. Hayes washing the trousers ; she was under my observation five or six weeks ; she was a tall person, with dark brown hair, high check bones, a rather Roman nose, a tooth out at the upper jaw—I think on the right side, but I am not positive ; she told me that she lost her back tooth in a factory at home, she wore imitation coral beads, which I should know again if I were to see them , these very much resemble them; they are exactly like; she wore them in three rows, I never saw her without them, her hair appeared to be darker than this, this may have been washed, and the effect of oiling the hair would be to make it appear darker , if this hair were oiled it would be of the same colour as that she wore; she had but little hair, and it was thinner on the top than at the sides of her head, I think that the tooth which was out was that next to the eye tooth, I meant to say that the tooth that was out was on my right side as she stood before me [witness is shown the skull], the tooth I speak of was in the same position as the missing tooth in the skull before me.
    She had a low forehead, similar to that of the skull, her nose came out high up as this does, I think I should know some of her clothing, I recognise this boa, this jacket, and three dresses (found in the iron box, exhibit W, found at Mr Marshall's, in Phillip-street) produced, as articles I have seen her wear; I have not the slightest doubt about them and this shawl (one of the articles named in the list exhibit R, as having been found in pledge at James's pawn office), on either the Thursday or the Friday, after I saw her washing the trousers, I noticed an old damask table cloth, hanging as a curtain at the back window on the floor level with the street, and about half way up the second pane from the bottom of the window; it was never there before; I first saw it about 9 o'clock in the morning, and it so much attracted my attention that I pointed it out to Mrs. Hayes, a neighbour; it remained there during the whole of the day, but next morning it had been removed, and I did not see it again; between 6 and 7 o'clock next morning I saw a man, with a bundle over his shoulder pass my window, facing the lane, and I thought it was the same cloth I had seen hanging at the window; I knew that they were going to leave the house, and I suspected that they were removing early, in order to evade paying the landlord, I cannot say whether prisoner is that man - I did not see his face, I recognise prisoner as a man I once saw walking with the woman, and it struck me at the time, from the general appearance of the man with the bundle, that it was the same man, the way he took led towards the closet, and a piece of waste ground at the back which at that time was open to everyone, the bundle was loosely tied, and had the appearance of a couple of dozen or so of clothes going to the wash, or it might be a good-sized blanket or two , it was in consequence of seeing the bundle that I looked at the window, when I found that the blind was gone, and I did not see it there again; I believe that the cloth I saw at the window and that on the man's back were the same, and still believe it; before the cloth was at the window I could see the staircase, but while it hung there I could not.
    By Mr Pinhey; She told me that she was married, and wore a wedding ring and a keeper; she went by the name of Mrs Scott, she told me that she had been about four years married to Scott - that after marriage he was away from her for about a twelve month - that during his absence she lived at either a boarding house or a boarding school, I cannot say which - that Scott did not like her living there, and she had to leave - and that she could not imagine why he had brought her to such a castle of a place as that; a female in black, accompanied by two children, more than once inquired for Mrs. Scott, I should think that she was about, or over thirty years of age, she was a tall person - over five feet - a great deal taller than myself and I am five feet in height.
    Ann Hayes deposed; I am the wife of Francis Hayes, and reside in Sussex-street; I reside in the next house to that occupied by Mrs Smith, in the lane running by the side of two houses in Sussex-street, the property of Mrs. Orr, one of which was occupied by Mrs Craig , the model produced represents the locality; I remember a woman living in the house next to Mrs Craig's, between it and Linsley's store, I knew the woman as Mrs. Scott, she was of about my height, with high cheek bones, and long nose, high at the bridge - what I call a Roman nose, I did not notice whether she wore a ring, she wore red beads, like these, either twice or three times round her neck; the first time I saw her she was washing a pair of tweed trousers at the tap, I helped her to stretch them when she had wrung the water out, that was on a Monday, about a week or a fortnight before Mrs. Craig left; I remember Mrs. Smith remarking to me a blind at one of the back windows after I saw Mrs. Smith washing the trousers, but during the same week, between 6 and 7 o'clock one morning I saw a man pass my door towards an open piece of land beyond the closets, carrying a bundle; I did not see his face; I called my husband's attention to the man, and my husband looked after him; I surmised that it was Mrs Scott's husband, she having told me that they were about to remove; he wore dirty -looking light tweed; Mrs Scott wanted a front tooth in the upper jaw; and she told me that she lost her back teeth before leaving home for Queensland; her cheeks were hollow, as if the teeth were wanting, her hair was very thin and of a dark brown colour; this hair (exhibit F) is of the same colour as Mrs Scott's; I recognise the Garibaldi jacket and the print dress produced (out of exhibit W); they were worn by Mrs Scott the last time I saw her, when washing the trousers; I also recognise a merino dress (out of the same lot) which she altered in my house , I have seen her wearing a boa like this, she told me that she was married to Scott in Queensland four years ago.
    Phillis Sibley deposed : I am a married woman, and my husband's name is Charles ; living at Blake's-buildings, near the Haymarket; I have known prisoner about four months, and I knew his wife ; they lived about two months within a few doors of me ; I first knew them when they came to live at Blake's-buildings, on the 20th June, and they left on the 14th August ; she came in the afternoon, and he came in the evening, after leaving his work at M'Carroll's ; she was a tall woman, about 5 feet 6½ inches in height ; her age about 30, high cheek bones, sunken cheeks, a thin Roman nose, not very long, high on the bridge, and a crease at the top, rather short and thin dark brown hair, a tooth out on the left side of upper jaw, and when conversing had a habit of placing her finger on the place whence the tooth was gone; this (exhibit F) is of the same colour as Mrs. Scott's hair ; I have noticed a wart or mole on the back of her right arm, about midway between the wrist and the elbow; I was yesterday shown, by senior-sergeant Taylor, at the dead house of the Benevolent Asylum, a right-arm marked as Mrs Scott's was; she had a round, plump, well-formed arm; I had frequent opportunities of observing her, as she often sat and sewed in my house for hours together, or stood in conversation at my door and passed for water several times in a day; she wore a string of red bead's like these two or three times round her neck , she wore a plain ring on the wedding ring finger, and sometimes wore a small brooch with hair; I have been in her house; I would know some of her clothing; I recognise the iron box (exhibit M) in Court, but instead of blue it was a kind of buff colour, they had no chairs, and it was used as a seat; I recognise also the japanned tin box (exhibit G) which Mrs Scott used as a bonnet box, she had a while horsehair bonnet, blue and white feathers, and trimmed with blue , this bonnet I have seen her wear , she sometimes wore a brown hat, I have heard her speak of having two black feathers; this brooch or one similar, I saw her wear one Sunday, I recognise the garibaldi jacket the blue merino dress, the mohair paletot, the lilac print dress, and the mohair dress produced, having seen them worn by her, I have seen her wearing boots like these, this striped mohair skirt I saw her make; this shawl and apron I have seen her wear, I recognise the pincushion produced, having seen it on Mrs Scott's mantelpiece with the name of " Scott" worked in pins which she told me was done by Harry, her husband; this muslin skirt she told me she wore at her marriage; she went by the name of Mrs Scott, she told me that she was called Annie at the lodging house in Jamison street where she lived; I have heard her mention her maiden name, but I forget the name; the prisoner and she lived as man and wife, and on Sunday afternoon they walked out together; I never spoke to him; I have called her Mrs Scott when prisoner has been within hearing; she told me once or twice that latterly she could not do anything to please Harry-he was always dissatisfied with whatever she did, on one occasion as I passed the house I heard her sobbing very heavily; he was at home - I heard him talking but did not see him; they removed from Blake's-buildings after midnight of Saturday, and prisoner went with the things towards Sussex street, passing Curran's, where Sussex street joins George-street, I have not seen Mrs Scott since they left on a Saturday early in August, but I am not certain whether it was on the 14th August.
    Charles Sibley, husband of the last witness, deposed I have known the prisoner about four months , I first knew him when he came to live in the neighbourhood; a female came with him - I understood that she was his wife - and lived with him as Mrs Scott all the time that he lived there; I have seen a large mole or wart on the outer side of her right arm, nearer to the wrist than to the elbow; senior-sergeant Taylor yesterday showed me two arms at the dead house of the Benevolent Asylum, one of which a right arm, bore marks similar to those on Mrs Scott's right arm.
    By Mr Pinhey; She told me that she was married to Harry at Queensland about four years ago , she said that they went from her mistress's house to be married, and returned to the same place for their marriage breakfast, she wore a wedding ring, and I fancy that she wore o keeper, but I am not certain; I once heard her sobbing, but never heard any quarrelling or disturbance between them.
    At 6pm the Court rose, remanding the prisoner until to-morrow.11
  • 26 Oct 1866: CENTRAL POLICE COURT. THURSDAY.
    BEFORE their Worships the Police Magistrate and Mr. Pinhey.
    THE MURDER CASE
    William Henry Scott, charged with the murder of Annie his wife, was brought up pursuant to remand. Mary Wood deposed; I am a married woman, and live in Market street. I know the prisoner, on the night of last Queen's Birthday he took a furnished room of me, I then lived in Liverpool street; on the 26th May, in the evening, after his work, he came with his wife to choose which of two rooms she would prefer; she told me that she was in a situation at a boarding house in some street, the name of which I forget; somewhere near where the young Prince died, and that she could not leave for a few days until she had put her successor in the way of doing the work, and she asked me to allow her "old man" (the prisoner) to stay there alone during the few days, as the place at which he then lodged was too far from his work; when he brought her to see the rooms, he said to me, "I have brought my wife to see the rooms, "she did not that night call him by his name, but often afterwards I heard her call him Harry; I think I have heard her also call him Robert; she generally addressed him as "My dear," or "Old man," and he called her Annie; they remained several weeks, when they left, he told me that he was going to occupy a room at Mr M'Carroll's, where he worked, and to be free of rent in consideration of some service to be rendered by Mrs Scott; I saw her nine weeks ago on last Saturday, when she told me that they were living in a large house in Sussex-street, that she did not like it, and hoped soon to get a smaller place, she was a tall, able woman, not fat, very short dark brown hair, five feet six inches to five feet seven inches in height—I have a daughter of the same size - she had a broken tooth on the left side near the front, I cannot say whether on the upper or lower jaw, she had a long, thin nose, with an extra-ordinary deep dent at the top, between her eyes, she wore a dark straw hat and either coral or cornelian beads.
    [The Police Magistrate intimated that he was so ill that he must retire, and put it to Mr Windeyer whether the prosecution should be proceeded with before Mr Pinhey alone, or be postponed until Monday. Mr Windeyer regretted his Worships indisposition, but hoped that as Mr Pinhey was, equally with Captain Scott, seized with the case, the inquiry would not be suspended. Mr Pinhey said that if no objection were raised by the prisoner's counsel, he would proceed with the case. Mr Thompson said that he would raise no objection to the case being concluded before Mr Pinhey.]
    They brought to my house an iron box like this (exhibit M), but not blue, the paint was something between brown and chocolate, and on the top was the name Annie Ramsden, and in the front were other letters or words, which I do not recollect, she told me that Annie Ramsden was her name before she was married, the prisoner and his wife showed me some things in the box one day which had been given to her by her mistress at Brisbane in Queensland, where they were married, prisoner had them in his hands and said that he was saving them until they commenced house keeping; they brought also the japanned box, (exhibit G) which she used as a bonnet box, she wore a small horsehair bonnet, with blue ribbon, and blue and white feathers; I recognise this as her bonnet, she wore a wedding ring, I frequently heard the prisoner speak of having been married to Annie at Brisbane, before he went to England, we used to chaff him for having been so long married and yet having no children, when he would say, that he was away from her a long time when he went to England and back, and he ought therefore to be excused and not blamed, for having no children.
    Sarah Gravvight, deposed; I live in service at Miss Grant's, in Jamison street, and have been living there a year and nine months; Miss Grant keeps a boarding house; I know the prisoner by his coming to see Mrs Scott at Miss Grant's; Mrs Scott was in service at Miss Grant's; she always went by that name at Miss Grant's; I think, but I am not quite sure, that it was about this time twelvemonth that Mrs Scott came to Miss Grant's; she remained about six months; she left since Christmas - I am nor sure, but it may be either four or five months ago; she was a tall woman, had dark brown hair, the bridge of her nose was rather high, a small head, narrow forehead, a tooth out of the upper jaw on the left side; I have heard her say that she had lost her back teeth; she always wore red beads similar to those (produced), she wore them singly round the neck, and hanging down under her dress in front; she used to sleep with me, and when she undressed I saw the beads as I have described, they had no clasp on them then; I think I should know her clothing, her chemise and drawers were made of twilled calico, twilled calico is not commonly used for these purposes, and I remarked it to her, when she told me that she brought them with her from home, I never saw any other woman wear such garments made of twilled calico, the piece of calico produced (found on the body exhibit B), is the same kind of material and is a side bottom piece of a chemise; these pieces (exhibits C and D) are of similar material. [The witness identified several dresses produced, as dresses she had seen Mrs Scott wear.] The japanned box (exhibit G) Mrs Scott used as a bonnet box, she had also a tin box like this (exhibit M), but it was then a kind of drab colour, she wore a plain wedding ring; I believed her to be a married woman, she was a nice quiet respectable woman, I cannot exactly say when prisoner first came to see her, but it was three weeks before she left, I saw him when he first came, he asked me "Is Mrs Scott here"? I said "Yes," I do not remember what he next said, I said "Who shall I say wants to see her?" He said" Tell her that her husband wants to see her, please," I told Mrs Scott that her husband wanted to see here, and she went to him, I was not present when they met; after tea that evening he came into the kitchen to see her; they seemed to be very fond of each other; she called him " Harry," and he called her "Annie," I have heard them in conversation about when they were married, but I do not remember what they said; she has told me that they were married at Mr Drane's, at Brisbane, I think Drane was the name she mentioned, it may have been Drake, I do not remember hearing prisoner say how long they had been married, he came to see her every night for three weeks , she told me that her maiden name was Ramsden; she told me that before she came to Miss Grant's she was living at Mrs Hinsch's in York street, when she left I understood from the prisoner that she had taken a house at Redfern, I know this photograph (in exhibit M), it is Mr Scott's likeness, Mrs Scott showed it to me, before prisoner came, as the likeness of Mr Scott, I recognise it as being like the prisoner; I recognise this mohair skirt (exhibit X) as one I have seen Mrs Scott wear.
    By Mr. Thompson; I know the dress by the material; I saw some skirts in Mr Reads office yesterday, which I recognised as having belonged to Mrs Scott, and which have not been produced here to day, she told me that she came from Yorkshire.
    By Mr Windeyer; I recognise these (a variety of other articles of wearing apparel previously identified by other witnesses) as having belonged to Mrs Scott, out of the bundles (exhibit R) found in pawn at James's; I know the skirt (exhibit X) by its material, its pattern, its many patches, and its general appearance; this hair (exhibit F) is like Mrs. Scott's.
    Sarah Hinch deposed; I am the wife of J. C. W. Hinsch of York-street, warehouseman; I know the prisoner as William Henry Scott; he is thinner than he was when I last saw him ; his wife came to live with me as general servant at Easter of last year ; I advertised for a servant in Monday's paper, and Mrs Scott made application; she said that she was a native of England; I objected because she was married, but told her I would give her an answer the next day ; she had left me about twenty minutes when the prisoner came to me; he said, "My wife was here a few minutes ago to obtain a situation ; I am about to proceed to England for the good of my health, and as I should like here to have a respectable situation before I go, I am very anxious that you should take her ; "he offered me a number of references of his own, which I did not think proper to look at ; he said he intended to pay his passage to Melbourne, and thence to work his way to England; I agreed to take her, and she came the next day ; he came with her, bringing her boxes, and came on Wednesday to see her ; he spoke of her to me as his wife, and when he addressed her he called her Annie; he shook hands and kissed her when parting on Wednesday, on which day he was to leave Sydney ; she wore a plain gold ring on the wedding finger; Mrs Scott was tall, very stout, well-made arms and legs (for a woman), long waist, flat chest or bosom, long neck, very small head in proportion to her general size, dark brown hair - not very long, fine and thin, especially on the top of her head - wanting a front tooth in the upper jaw ; I will not say for certain on which side, but I think the left ; low, slightly wrinkled forehead, high cheek-bones, fresh coloured; nose very-prominent on the upper part near the eyes, and very straight and thin downward ; above the prominence of the nose was a very small wrinkle ; her back teeth were very bad, which caused her to be very slow in eating ; her hair was fine, like this, but this appears to be of a lighter colour ; if this were oiled it would be much about the colour of her hair ; she every day wore a black chenille hair net, small earrings with long old- fashioned drops in her ears, and small red beads very much resembling these [produced] either twice or thrice round her neck ; Scott brought on the Tuesday a large tin trunk-shaped box, painted a light oak or buff colour like this (exhibit M), and crushed on the top as this is, and a round japanned tin box like this (exhibit G) which she used as a bonnet-box ; the large box had a name and address upon it, which she said was that of the person in England who gave it her ; her underclothing, chemises, and drawers were made of twilled calico ; I have noticed the sowing of her chemises -a very uncommon seam, top-sewed and felled down ; her chemises were also of a peculiar cut ; I have remarked to her the peculiarity of the work of her chemises ; I said "You have particularly neat work in your chemises," in reply to which she said that she had more of the same make and material in her box, which had not been worn ; this piece of calico (exhibit B) I call twilled calico, the same kind of material I noticed in her chemises, and the sewing is of the very same character ; it is top sewn and felled down, as I have described ; the work generally in this piece is of the same character as Mrs. Scott's needlework - she was a very strong sewer ; this piece (B) is a side gore out of a chemise ; these pieces (C and D) are of the same material, and are nearer the colour of the garments Mrs. Scott wore : these chemises and drawers (out of exhibit W) are of the same material and workmanship as those she had in use when she lived with me ; this hair-net produced is of the kind she used to wear; this morocco reticule I recognise as Mrs. Scott's ; she has shown me this likeness of Mr. Scott, and she said that she had not obtained a better one before he went to England ; I used to write letters for Mrs Scott, addressed to William Henry Scott, Melbourne, in reply to letters addressed by him to my residence for her ; as she could not read, I had to read them for her ; his writing was generally better than this [letter put into her hands], but of a similar character ; in one of his letters he wrote that it might be three years or a very long time before they would meet again, which seemed very much to affect her ; she was a very steady, hard-working woman.
    Remanded, at half-past 5 p.m., until to-morrow, at half past 11 a.m.12
  • 27 Oct 1866: CENTRAL POLICE COURT. FFRIDAY.
    THE MURDER CASE (CONTINUED).
    Before his Worship Mr. Pinhey.
    Ellen Crawford, wife of Hugh Crawford, of Clarence street, baker, deposed: I know the prisoner at the bar ; I first knew him about two years ago ; he and his wife took a room in my house ; they came together ; he said that they had just come from the country, and that the room would suit them until he got into some situation ; they remained three weeks ; Mrs. Scott left a week before he did ; he told me that he had got a situation for her, and she told me that it was a place in York-street ; he said that he was going to Melbourne; he spoke of her sometimes as "my wife," and at other times as "Annie;" while she was at Mrs. Hinsch's, in York-street, she frequently visited ma on Sunday afternoon ; on leaving Mrs. Hinsch she stopped with me for about a week repairing her clothes, and then she went to be cook and laundress at Miss Grant's, Jamison-street ; she was a tall, well-looking woman, of good colour, very thin, short fine brown hair, rather bald on the top of her head, a long thin nose, high on the bridge, rather hollow between the eyes, forehead short and a little wrinkled, flat in the chest, body not very stout, one tooth out on left side of upper jaw, some back teeth out and others decayed ; I knew her as Annie Scott; she wore a plain wedding ring and small rings without drops in her ears; she had drops but did not wear them ; they brought boxes with them, one was a high tin or iron box like this (exhibit M), but instead of blue it was of a buff or oak colour; also a japanned tin box like this (exhibit G), as a bonnet box ; he brought an axe like this, and I had it in use all the time he was away ; I next saw prisoner in the latter end of April this year ; he said that he bad been home to England [the witness identified several articles of wearing apparel in Court as having been worn by Mrs. Scott] ; this muslin garibaldi jacket (out of exhibit R) she wore when I last saw her, eight weeks ago last Monday (20th August) ; this hair (exhibit F) resembles Mrs, Scott's in fineness, and if oiled would correspond in colour ; she had rather a small head in proportion to her body ; I have seen her wear red beads like these twice or thrice round her neck; he lodged with me three weeks after bis return from (as he said) England, until he took a house ; he brought his clothes, when he came from England, wrapt up in a blanket like this (exhibit U) ; I took Mrs. Scott to be thirty years of age, or perhaps more; she was a tall woman—a great deal taller than I am.
    By Mr. Thompson : When I heard that Scott was charged with the murder of his wife, I said that I should know some of her clothes ; I described Mrs. Scott to the police as I have done to-day ; the only question asked of me was in reference to her teeth.
    George Fox deposed : I om sexton of St. Paul's Church, Ipswich, Queensland ; I know prisoner by sight ; I frequently saw him at Coleman's, a butcher's shop at Ipswich, where he was employed during several months of the year 1864 ; on the 10th October, 1864, I witnessed the ceremony of marriage between William Henry Scott and Ann Ramsden, by the Rev. Lacey H. Rumsey, minister of St. Paul's Church, Ipswich, according to the ceremonies of the Church of England ; the prisoner is the man who was then married as William Henry Scott ; the female was a tall person, perhaps five feet five or six inches ; she was taller than the prisoner, her husband ; having seen her but on that one occasion, I do not recollect anything further of her personal appearance.
    Ellen Mellenophy, the wife of Thomas Mellenophy, residing at Newtown, deposed : I knew the prisoner ; I first saw him in the latter end of August, at the shop of Mr Rice, the butcher; he asked me if I knew any one who would do washing for him ; I said that I would, and that night he brought me a shirt and a couple of smail articles ; I washed them and took them to him at the shop ; I next saw him on the 8th September, when he asked me how much he owed me for washing ; I replied " Never mind—let it remain until you bring some more; "on Monday, the 10th, he brought two single blankets, a blue and a green, and a piece of grey blanket, wrapped in an old petticoat and a skirt ; he told me that I need not wash the petticoat and the skirt, but throw them away, and asked me to have them done by the following evening ; I said that they would not be dry "by that time, but that, he might come for them on the next evening; he said that the blankets were very dirty, the pigs having dragged them through the blood ; on Thursday he come and I gave him the blankets, but not the skirt and the petticoat, which I gave up to senior sergeant Taylor; tho skirt and petticoat produced are those in which the blankets were wrapped and which he left with me as I have stated; these (exhibits U and V) are the blankets he brought, and the piece of grey (out of exhibit R) blanket; they were rolled up tight, were very hard, and very much stained, with blood in patches larger than my hand ; the blood made them stiff ; I think the blood was quite through the blankets, but I am not sure ; all the blankets were blood-stained ; the smell of the blankets was very offensive, in consequence of the quantity of blood they contained ; they made me quite sick; when I returned them, I said to him, "Do you put those blankets round you slaughtering, for they were in an "awful state;" he said "No, but the pigs dragged them through the blood while I was slaughtering;" I got a great deal of blood out of them, but could not get it all out; although. I had the blankets four times under the tap, blood still came from them, and marks of blood remained; on the Thursday that I returned the blankets to him I saw him talking to a young woman, a friend of mine, he was to take to the play that evening ; they went out together for a short time, returning in about a half-hour, when he said that they did not go into the theatre, as one of the actors was drunk ; he then took from his pocket a small wedding ring; he said respecting it, "I bought it for a young woman who disappointed me in marriage ; "he said on receiving the blankets that he had a pair of trousers which were very much stained, the same as the blankets, which he would bring for me to wash ; I fixed, the time, the 10th September, because that the 8th was the last day of the Randwick Races, and that day I was at Rice's ; at the time he brought me the blankets he brought also a light tweed coat which was slightly stained with small spots of blood near the collar ; I think that the coat now on prisoner's back is the same ; I was then living at No. 4, Little Hunter-street.
    Elizabeth Smith deposed : I am the wife of James Smith, stevedore, and reside in Frazer's-lane, or Brown Bean-lane, and near the shop of Rice, the butcher, in Lower George-street ; I know the prisoner before the Court ; I have known him two months last Wednesday ; I knew him as a butcher at Rice's, and as a lodger in Mrs. Cassidy's house, of which I also occupy a portion; he occupied a room ; on a Friday, about the time of the Randwick races, Mrs. Cassidy asked me, in consequence of her husband being confined to his bed by sickness, and being herself unwell, to wash some things prisoner had asked her to do for him ; she gave me two blue flannel aprons, a shirt, and a pair of tweed trousers belonging to the butcher (the prisoner), and a lot of things of her own ; I washed them ; there was blood on all his (the prisoner's)—a good deal of blood on the apron and about the knees of the trousers ; on the Friday, while the things were in the tub, prisoner asked me for the trousers ; I told him that they were wet ; about half-past 7 o'clock next morning he asked he again for the trousers, and I told him that they were not quite dry, but that as such as they were dry I would take them over to him ; he said that he had been killing for Mr. Rice all night at the abattoirs, and he was afraid that Mr. Rice would pass some observations on the dirty shirt and trousers he was wearing ; I took the trousers to him at the shop, and on the next day (Sunday) I took the two aprons and the shirt up to his room ; I found him sitting in a corner, with a round tin box open before him : he was looking at some collars, and near him lay a white horsehair bonnet, trimmed with blue, a flat crown, a white curtain, a blue and white feather, white cap front with blue edges ; I took it up and said, "It is a pretty little bonnet;" he said, "Do you like that style? lt is my wife's bonnet—she is coming up from Melbourne;" I came away; on Monday he told me that he had a row with Mr. Rice's stepson about selling a piece of beef under the price, and had left—that he was going to lodge at Newland's until his wife, a farmer's daughter and very pious woman, came from Melbourne. when he would have to take a house; the box produced (exhibit G) and bonnet are these I saw in his room on the Sunday; on the Thursday before the Friday on which I washed the things he brought to the house the head and the foot of an iron bedstead.
    By Mr Thompson: I only saw prisoner once or twice a week, as he went to or left his room.
    Mary Ann, the wife of James Cassidy, deposed : I live in Brown-Bear lane, or Frazer's-lane, Lower George-street ; my husband is a seafaring man, and has had bad health lately ; it is, I think, about ten weeks since prisoner took a room of me ; about six weeks ago I asked Mrs. Smith, who lives in my house, to do some washing—a flannel shirt, two blue aprons, and a pair of trousers—prisoner had given me to do tor him ; he kept the room three weeks, but I never knew him to sleep a night in it ; I never knew him to have any person there ; he paid me 4s. a week rent for the room.
    Tho Court adjourned at a quarter past 4 p.m., and the prisoner was remanded until Monday.13
  • 30 Oct 1866: CENTRAL POLICE COURT. Monday.
    Before his Worship Mr. Pinhey.
    THE MURDER CASE - CONTINUED.
    Thomas Rice, deposed; I carry on business as a butcher in Lower George street, in this city; prisoner entered my service on or about the 8th July last, and remained, first as a salter and then as second shopman, until the 10th September when I discharged him; it was part of his business to cut up meat; he never, to my recollection, slaughtered for me at the Abattoirs - it was no part of his regular business and I had men for that special purpose; he was never there all night slaughtering for me, he was not at the Abattoirs slaughtering for me on the Friday night before I discharged him, I sometimes had pigs at my place, I believe prisoner slept at my place once or twice; I was not aware whether he was a married or a single man; I know of nothing in connection with my premises by which it is at all probable that pigs could have had access to any of the men's blankets and drag them through blood; they never had a chance of doing so, being kept in a stye, the door of which is always bolted; blood is not allowed to remain - never does remain, more than from a quarter to a half hour; the yard is flagged and drained, and is well sluiced with water as soon as the killing is over; the men's sleeping place is about thirty yards distant from where tho pigs are kept, and is up stairs; he may have had blankets there, but I never knew of it; I remarked something peculiar in his demeanour during the last week of his being in my shop; it was his business to serve chance customers; he seemed to be very much confused, and slow in serving, so that I had once or twice to speak to him, which I had never previously seen occasion to do; on the contrary, he had been so smart and active that, some weeks before, I had on that ground increased his wages; this week he seemed bothered - I had two or three times in the course of the week to say to him "Scott, serve those people," and on the 10th September found it necessary to discharge him.
    Robert Silvester deposed; I am a butcher, in the employ of Mr Rice, and was in his employ in September last; I noticed a change in prisoner's manner during the last few days he was in the service; he used to walk about the place, and scarcely speak to or look at any one, and was otherwise strange in his manner; his manner had been free and jocular, but now he scarcely ever spoke; I noticed his change of manner at the time; a week or a fortnight previous, or perhaps a month, I had noticed that he carried a pistol in his coat pocket, and very frequently employed himself during leisure time in polishing it; one of the men out of a lark spiked the pistol; I went to his pocket to see how the pistol was spiked, and I found also in his pocket a paper marked " Prussic acid, poison": I asked prisoner why he carried poison and a pistol - I said "Harry, what makes you carry a pistol and poison about with you?"; He said "Go to hell and mind your own business": I said " If the police knew that you carried the pistol and the poison about with you, you would be liable to three months;" I have seen a woman come to the shop for him, and I have seen him and her walking together; I have seen her there at various hours of the day and once in the evening when he was leaving work he went away with her; she was a tall young woman, rather taller than prisoner, had dark hair and eyes, her nose was rather high at the bridge and was sharp at the point, he told me he lived near the Hay market - and showed me - up an alley by the side of Evans's butcher s shop; the woman was spoken of amongst us in Rice's shop as "the Kangaroo," I recollect the Sunday previous to his leaving Rice's on the Monday; I had a conversation with him that day; having ripped my trousers, I had occasion to borrow a pair in which to go home; I did not ask prisoner, but he said, "George, if I had another pair of trousers here I would lend you a pair, but these (pointing to those he was wear ing) are the only ones I have got here, "I thanked him, and told him that I had a pair; directly afterwards he said, "I have made away with 'the Kangaroo'" I said nothing; he then said, " I have done away with 'the Kangaroo,'" I said "Harry, what do you mean? ' and he replied, "I have turned the - up altogether' I said that I had no time to stop yarning; I was washing while this conversation was going on, and while I was putting on my clothes to go home prisoner, putting both hands to his head, exclaimed, "My God, my God, I can neither sleep nor rest night or day" and directly afterwards said, 'I am going to buy some blankets and come here to sleep altogether;" I said, " You may save yourself that trouble, for I do not think that you are going to be here any longer,' or words to that effect; he said, "I have been able to get my living before I came, and can do so again; I have been sleeping at the Rose of Australia these last two or three nights, and it is rather expensive to pay a shilling a night for a bed, I told him that as I was going home, he might sleep on my bed that night, he thanked me, and I came away; when he told me that he had been sleeping at the Rose of Australia, I said to him, "You are a rum cove, paying rent for a room and going to sleep at a public house, 'I do not remember whether he made any reply; I went to Mr Rice's in July last; I slept on the premises about five nights in the week; I never knew of the prisoner being engaged at the Abattoirs killing for Mr Rice; he was not slaughtering at Glebe Island for Mr Rice on the Friday night before he left Mr Rice's service; I never saw any blankets belonging to prisoner at Mr Rice's, and I believe that he only one night slept at Mr Rice's; I never heard of blankets belonging to him having been dragged through the blood by pigs , it is but seldom that pigs are kept there, and when they are they are kept in a close pen by themselves, I never saw pigs loose running about the place, I know of no circumstances which would render it probable, or even possible, that blankets could be dragged through blood by pigs on Mr Rice's premises, the men's bedding is kept in the house, in the room over the shop; I last saw the woman we called 'the Kangaroo' on the last Tuesday night that prisoner was in Mr Rice's employ; she was standing in George street by the Chinese merchant's, opposite Mr Rice's shop; she appeared to be waiting for prisoner; he told me, while working with prisoner at M'Carroll's, before going to Rice's, when the men were chaffing him about "the Kangaroo" and I asked him if he was going to be married, he said to me, "I have got a better girl in Melbourne, and some day I expect to make her my wife"; that was some time in June, and he has spoken of her since.
    Thomas Franklin deposed; I am a butcher, in the employ of Mr Rice, I know prisoner by his having worked at Mr Rice's, I remember his leaving, and that on a Sunday, shortly before he left I noticed him with a pistol, firing at a sheep's head; I cannot say that this (produced) is, the pistol, but it was one about the same size; he struck the sheep's head about the centre, between the horns, fractured the bone, and rebounded; he asked me if the ball had penetrated the brain; I said that it had not, the sheep being dead, but that if the sheep had been alive most likely the ball would have penetrated the brain, he split the head to look for the ball, he did not tell me, nor did I ask him, why he was so employed with the pistol, I afterwards spiked the pistol by driving a tack down the nipple - that was one day of the week at the close of which he left, I was told by the foreman to remove prisoner's coat from the shepboard, and as I did so the pistol fell from the side pocket, with a box of percussion caps, and some gunpowder in a rag; there was also in his pocket a small paper parcel marked ' poison' I do not recollect that the poison was described by name, a tall young woman was in the habit of coming to the shop to see him, I saw her about three times, but never spoke to her; she was spoken of amongst us as "The Kangaroo;" he told me on one occasion, about a fortnight before he left and after the firing at the sheep's head, while working in the salting-house, that he had had a few words with 'the Kangaroo' because she had slighted him, but that he did not care a -; he said that she asked his sanction to go to a party, that he gave it, and that they had had some words because he thought that she had slighted him - that she had offered him £20 at any time that he liked to buy furniture.
    Cross examined; I spiked the pistol out of mischief, and examined the pocket out of curiosity.
    William Newlands deposed; I keep the Rose of Australia Inn, George street North; I know the prisoner at the bar, I first knew him in the month of August last as a butcher in the employ of Mr Rice, he came to sleep at my house on the night of Saturday, the 8th of September, and on the nights of Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday, the 9th, 10th, and 11th; he came late, as I supposed, after the shop was shut up, he told me on Monday morning that he had left Mr Rice, that he expected his wife from Melbourne very soon, or during the week and that he wanted to take a room for her, he brought to my house, on Monday, two boxes and two ends of a bedstead to remain with me until he had a room; these boxes (exhibits G and H) are those he brought, I afterwards gave the things to senior- sergeant Waters.
    Edgar Walter Weeks deposed; l am now employed by Mr O'Neill, pastrycook, but was previously in the employ of Mr Cripps, pastrycook; I recognise the prisoner at the bar; I first saw him about six weeks ago, about the end of a week; I am not certain as to the time; it must have been Thursday or Friday, because my white trousers were getting dirty, I was coming down George street, near the Prince Albert Hotel, near the Haymarket, opposite the junction of George street with Sussex street, between 10 and 11 o'clock at night, when a man came to me from the opposite side of the street, and said, "My boy, would you mind helping me with a box;" the prisoner is the man; I said, "Where are you going'" and he replied, "O, just down here, in Sussex street," he took me to the house next door to Linsley's store, in Sussex street, he opened the door with a key, and I followed him in; I said ' Have you no light here?"; he replied "No," I said, " Where is the box?"; he said, "Here - lay hold of it; I said, "Where? "Here," he said, " Iay hold of it, ' I found the box a little to the right of the door, as you enter, and took hold of it; it was a tin box with an oval lid; I took hold of it by a handle at the end, and he took the handle at the other end, and we brought it outside; as soon as I entered the house I smelt a horrible smell - as I thought, the smell of a dead body; I know by experience the smell of a dead body, having had a brother who died, and was once in the hospital where the dead body of my father lay; I only saw the box in such lights as were in the street; this box (exhibit M) is like the box, but is not of the same colour; I had buns in my pocket, some of which I took out and placed upon the lid of the box, but in carrying the box the buns fell off, and I stopped to pick them up, when he said, " Never mind them, come on quick, I am in a hurry": in stooping to pick up the buns I smelt a dreadful smell, which smell came from the box, the smell was that I found at the house, I put my buns into my pocket again; we walked along, carrying the box, towards Goulburn street, the box was so heavy that I had to put it down to rest about every six steps, I rested about a dozen times before we reached the corner of Goulburn street, I smelt the smell all along, I said, "What is in this box, master?" he gave me such a look, and said, "It is only a lot of corned beef," he looked at me as if he would like to eat me , I said, "It does not smell very well," and he replied, "No - I am afraid that it will not keep until I get down there," I then said, "Where are you going with it - to the New Company's?" he said at first, "Yes - I am going to Newcastle," but, immediately afterwards said, "O no, I am going to Melbourne," when we got up as far as Bowman's, the corner of Goulburn street and Sussex street, I said, "I cannot carry it any farther, it is too heavy for me," I could have carried it farther, but I got frightened, and would not carry it farther, he replied, " All right, my boy, I will go and get some one who can carry it with me"; he left the box with me in the middle of the road, saying "Stand by, my boy, do not go away for a minute until I get some one," he went to Bowman's bar, returned to me with a lad, and said to me, "Here you are, my boy, here is threepence for you," giving me a three penny bit, I came away and they went with the box along Sussex street toward Liverpool street; besides, when I dropped the buns, he hurried me all along, saying, " Come on, my boy, I am in a hurry, or I shall lose the steamer, and she leaves at 10 o'clock."
    By Mr Thompson; I cannot say whether it was moonlight that night, but I saw the prisoner and the box; I have not seen him since that night until to-day. David John Fitzpatrick deposed; I am a shoemaker, and live with my master on Church-hill; my parents live in Sussex-street; I know prisoner by sight, I first saw him one night seven or eight weeks ago, in Bowman's public house, on either a Tuesday or a Thursday night, but I am not certain either as to the day of the week or as to how many weeks ago, he came to me at Bowman's public house at the corner of Goulburn-street and Sussex street between 10 and 11 o'clock, when I was looking on at some persons playing bagatelle, he said, "I say, young chap, will you come down and help me with a box," I said, 'I do not mind, as I am going down that way, "I went out with him, he took me to a tin box in the middle of the street, by which a boy was standing, he handed something to the boy, who went down Sussex-street, I took hold of one handle of the box, it was a tin box, it stood rather high, had an oval cover, was grained oak colour, as doors are painted, and had an iron handle at each end; this box (M) is like it, but is of a different colour, prisoner and I carried the box along Sussex street as far as Liverpool street, he asked me what that street was, and I told him, he said "Let us go down here a bit," and we went with the box down Liverpool street, towards the water, nearly as far as Mr. Murphy's gate, where we put it down, he said, "What place is this?" I said "It is Mr Murphy's"; he went by himself as far as the edge of the water, stood a minute, and turned back; there is no wharf at the end of Liverpool street; on his return he said, "What does Mr Murphy keep?" I told him, a lime wharf, he said "Has Mr Murphy a barrow? ' and I said yes; he knocked, and a young man came to the door, of whom prisoner asked if Mr Murphy would wheel a box as far as the Company s wharf, and I said " No, Mr Murphy is a magistrate, he would not wheel it," he said to the young man, "Well, I do not understand it rightly, will you lend me a barrow?" the young man said that he had nothing to do with the place and could not lend a barrow, prisoner said "You need not be frightened about it, I will leave my coat and waistcoat with you until I come back,' the young man still refused, and we came back to the box, he said "Let us take it again, and look for a barrow," we carried it up Liverpool street until we came to some timber yards, when prisoner looked over a fence to see if he could find a barrow, he came back and said; 'There is nobody in, let us put it on this cart' (a spring cart standing on the opposite side of the road), we put the box on the cart, and then handing me his coat and hat, he took the box on his shoulder, and carried it up Liverpool street to Sussex street, along Sussex street as far as North street, when he put it down, and we carried it between us into a yard at the back of Kelly's public house, prisoner said, "Let us leave it in here while we go and look for a barrow," we put it down there and left it ; he asked me if I knew where to get a barrow, and I replied that I was a stranger there, and did not know, we went along to Druitt street, and returned without a barrow to Kelly's yard, but did not go in, he said, "I will leave it there until the morning, and will bring a cart for it,' he said, "How much shall I give you for your trouble' I replied, "What you like," he gave me a shilling, we went together along Sussex street nearly as far as to Liverpool street, when he went into a shop and I went home, I last saw the box in a yard at the back of Kelly's public house; I saw no one but ourselves about the place, there was no lamp about there , the box was heavy, when he came to me he said that he had been since 8 o'clock bringing it there, but he did not say where he brought it from , he said when he put it inside the yard that he wanted it on board the Newcastle boat, and I told him that the bell had rung, and that he was too late for the boat that night, I noticed a bad small when I first came to the box, I never smelt such a smell before, and I smelt it all the time I was carrying the box, the prisoner said, after he put the box off his back 'There's the - pickle running out,' I said " I see it is": I saw a liquid like water running out at one of the bottom corners, some of the stuff went on my coat; I cannot say whether the prisoner got any on his clothes , I did not see him wipe his clothes, I do not recollect anything being said about the contents of the box, I did not ask, nor did he say, I pointed out to Inspector Read and Senior sergeants Taylor and Waters the place where I last saw the box, I saw them looking into a water closet a few yards from where I last saw the box , I saw prisoner afterwards drinking at the bar of Kelly's public-house, at the corner of George street and Bathurst street, and recognised him, I saw him as I passed, and stood to look at him; the next time I saw him crossing the Police Court yard, he is the man for whom I carried the box, I have no doubt of it.
    By Mr Thompson; Some of the liquid out of the box fell on my coat; l am wearing the same coat now, the smell has gone off, I was with him about three quarters of an hour on the night that I helped him to carry the box.
    The Court rose at 5 pm.
    Mr Windeyer asked for a remand until 10 a.m. on Wednesday. Remanded accordingly.14
  • 1 Nov 1866: CENTRAL POLICE COURT. Wednesday,
    Before his Worship Mr. W. T. Pinhey.
    THE MURDER CASE (NINTH DAY) CONCLUDED.
    Senior sergeant Waters recalled: In consequence of information received I went in company with senior sergeant Taylor, on the morning of Sunday, the 21st of the present month—the last witness Fitzpatrick being with us—to a yard at the back of Kelly's public house, the Walter Scott Inn, at the corner of Sussex-street and Bathurst street, and Fitzpatrick, the last witness, pointed out a spot, about 10 or 11 o'clock on the night of the same day Taylor and I returned to the place, accompanied by Mr Kirkpatrick, the father of the boy who found the remains in the rubbish heap, and we searched a closet. Kirkpatrick brought a three pronged implement used in mixing plaster or mortar, and drew up a large piece of flesh, and then a second but smaller piece, we then took up the floor, and near the surface found a leg and an arm of a human being; we caused the closet to be emptied, and in the soil found another leg, from the knee downward, another arm, and a number of pieces of flesh, we had these remains carefully washed, and then removed in a shell to the dead house of the Benevolent Asylum; from the spot pointed out by the boy to the entrance of the yard is a distance of about nine yards, and from the entrance of the yard to the closet is about nine yards farther; the closet is so enclosed that a person in the street cannot see into it.
    Senior sergeant Taylor deposed: I accompanied Waters and Kirkpatrick to the closet in Kelly's yard, described in the model produced, on the night of the 21st October; we searched the closet and found some human remains, which, after washing, we nailed down in a shell and removed to the dead-house; I informed Dr. Renwick of the circumstance, at 7 o'clock am on Monday, the 23rd, I met Dr Renwick at the dead house, and in his presence opened the shell, and found that the remains consisted of two arms (right and left) from the shoulder downwards, two legs (right and left) from the knee downward, the pelvis, one thigh bone, a large thigh-bone, about thirteen pieces of skin and muscle, and some fragments resembling lungs, &c; I left them with Dr Renwick; in the forenoon of the same day I procured an order and exhumed a shell which had been interred in the Roman Catholic burial ground, on opening which I saw that it contained the trunk of a human body; the trunk was that which on Saturday, the 15th September, I saw lying on a piece of waste ground off Sussex street; left it in the charge of Dr Renwick, at the dead house of the Benevolent Asylum; on Tuesday (the next) morning, in consequence of further information, I proceeded with Mr and Mrs Sibley to the dead house, reopened the shell Dr Renwick being present, and both Mr and Mrs Sibley pointed out on the right arm, about four inches from the main joint of the thumb, a mole or wart of about the bigness of a medium sized pea; the remains were buried that day; I have compared these paper writings (produced and marked Y) with a letter dated October 7th, 1866 found in prisoner's box at Artlett's, and which he told me was his writing; the writing appears to me to be of the same hand, I believe these papers came from Melbourne, they are letters from the prisoner to a person in Melbourne, addressed in them as Emma and as his wife.
    Margaret Smith, wife of Patrick Smith, of Sussex-street, mason, deposed I know the prisoner by his having lived at my house, he came on the afternoon of a Sunday, the date I do not remember, and asked for twopenny worth of milk, the house is situated between Liverpool street and athurst-street, about a hundred yards from Kelly's public house, l am not now living at that house, I recollect some human remains being found near Barker's mills, prisoner was then staying with me, it was on the Sunday before the find ing of the remains that he came, I do not remember the date, he asked me if I knew of a place where he could stop, he said that Mr. Rice was about giving him the sack, and that he, wanted a place to stop at, I told him that I had a back room furnished that I would let, he said that he preferred to sleep in the front room because that he wanted to be up early in the morning to see the paper; on Monday morning he brought his boxes, a tin box-this (exhibit M) is one, but is not now of the same colour - it was a kind of yellow colour, the other was a wooden box containing butchers' tools and two blankets, in the afternoon he went out, after telling me that he did let expect to be in that night; he was not in either that night or the following, I think that he did not sleep there until the Thursday; he rose very early, and was in general away before my husband went to his work , on the Saturday while he was their the remains of a female were found about 200 yards from the back of my house, which looks out upon the piece of land near Barker's Mills on which the remains were found; I heard of the discovery from about 11 to 12 o'clock in the forenoon of a Saturday, prisoner was then staying at my house, I told him of the circumstance, after having seen them, on my return to the house I saw the prisoner, and remarked to him, "What a cruel murder that must have been, whoever committed it!" prisoner made no reply, nothing more took place then; several other times afterwards the subject was spoken of, in the way of conversation, in prisoner's presence, by the inmates of my house, but he never joined in or seemed to take any notice of the conversation, besides the boxes he brought a great many parcels, and many of them he removed before he left, on the Monday after the remains were found he told me that he had got a situation at Newtown, and very early on the morning of Tuesday, before 5 o'clock, he took away the yellow tin (exhibit M), either that night or Wednesday night he came, and in reply to my question how he liked his place, he said that neither he liked them, nor they liked him, and on one of the subsequent evenings of that week he brought back the iron box, which was then of a different colour, blue instead of yellow, he said "I have been improving my box," he stopped until Monday, when he took away the box, saying that he was going to a situation at Weirs, near M'Carroll's, in Pitt street; these are the blankets (exhibit V) prisoner brought to my house and I delivered to the police , I also gave the police a small phial marked "chloroform," which I found in his box containing tools, during the week after the remains were found prisoner asked me if I could wash a few things for him, they were tied up in a handkerchief, they consisted of a white shirt, two aprons, a crimean shirt, two pocket handkerchiefs, and a pair of trousers; if I had seen them I would not have consented to wash them, the trousers were covered with blood from the waist downwards, and smelt very bad, I attributed the state of his trousers to his calling as a butcher, he seemed to be very uneasy, fidgetty, like a man not right in his head, a gateway opens from the premises upon the piece of land where the remains were found; he put the iron box in the front room, near the sofa on which he slept, the front of the box he placed towards the wall, and upon it he kept his blankets, he was several times alone in the house, and had plenty of opportunities of going out and in as he liked, he told me to keep the things (those things she had delivered to the police) until he should call for them.
    Matilda Marshall, wife of Joseph Marshall, residing in Phillip-street, deposed: Prisoner took a room of my house about six or seven weeks ago , he came on a Monday morning, in consequence of his being (as he said) a single man, a butcher, and of quiet habits, I let him a room for 4s instead of 5s a week; he left a bundle, and on Tuesday morning he brought his box—a tin box—with two handles, painted a buff colour, which the next day he painted a blue colour inside as well as out; before painting it he scratched out a name on the front; on the morning he brought the box, he said that he had been waiting at the public-house on the other side the street until I opened the house before he could bring it in; I said to him "It seems rather heavy, why did you not ask me to assist you?" he said "O never mind, I can manage it; " the same evening as soon as the paint was dry, he took the box away - he said, to get his name on it, he did not bring it back, but on either Thursday or Friday brought home a shoe trunk (exhibit W), which I subsequently delivered to Inspector Reid; he brought the tin box full, and took it away empty; he stopped a fortnight, and when he gave up the room, he said that he was going as a shopman to a butcher, and asked me to allow the trunk to remain a short time as he would not want anything out of it until his wife came up from Melbourne; he never slept a night in the room, he called three times afterwards, and one occasion said that as soon as his wife came from Melbourne he would take the larger room in my house.
    Arthur Renwick, M.D. , deposed I am a legally qualified medical practitioner of the Board of New South Wales, and visiting medical officer to the Sydney Benevolent Asylum.
    On the forenoon of Saturday, 15th September 1866, certain human remains were brought in a deal shell or coffin to the dead house of the Asylum, and they were examined by me afterwards; in the shell were also some shank bones belonging to a sheep or similar animal; there was also a piece of cloth, covered with blood and decomposed matter, to which reference is hereafter made. The remains consisted of a head and a portion of the neck and thorax or chest of a human being, in separate parts. The remains were so much decomposed that any recognition of the features was impossible, and this result arose not only from putrefaction, but also from the action of common fire on the parts, the whole having the odour of roasted or baked meat as well as the ordinary scent of the putrefactive process. The chest portion consisted of the vertebrae of the neck, together with the vertebra, ribs etc, forming the thorax or chest. The muscles covering the neck and the chest, as well as the breast, &c , had been completely removed; those lying between the spines of the vertebrae, and the prominences of the ribs at the back (ie deep muscles of the back) had been left and when cut into were found to be in a very good state of preservation. The arms had been removed at the shoulder joint, much of the muscular substance had been cut away, and the traces of the mode of removal had been obscured by the charring action of fire.
    This was the case equally on both sides of the body. The soft part left on the neck bones had been similarly treated. This portion of the body (chest) had been separated from the rest of the trunk (missing) by a clean incision made through the inter vertebral cartilage. The apices of the lung, black, shrivelled up, and decomposed, lay at the top of the thorax. When the loose dirt and other matters on the chest portion had been completely removed, a circular hole, about three fourths of an inch in circumference, was observed in the third intercostal space on the right side, equidistant from the margins of the ribs, and about two inches from the margin of the sternum or breastbone. The edges were regular and black, but it was impossible, from decomposition and charring of the part, to show what the nature of the wound was. It had a similar appearance to a hole made by a bullet or by the parts having been pierced with a red hot poker or by a butcher's steel. On the left side, the parts near the floating ribs had been torn, as if gnawed by dogs but this was evidently a post mortem occurrence. When this portion (trunk) was examined more carefully it was found that to it all the bones of the neck (cervical vertebrae) were attached, with the exception of the atlas or first bone. The dislocation and separation had been carefully made at this part, and the traces of the cutting obscured by the charring action of fire. The muscular substance left, and the other parts, when cut into, were found to be much fresher than would have been expected from the general appearance of the remains; I carefully removed the first vertebra of the neck attached to this portion of the body, it was the axis or second bone of the neck. I made a preparation of it, marked it D, and handed it over to the police. On it I found a deep incision on the neck of the odontoid process, in the bone substance, made with a sharp cutting instrument. There were also a number of similar marks, but not so deep, on the body of the bone in front. The head portion of the remains had the general appearance of having been baked or roasted especially about the face. The tongue was swelled, protruded of blue colour, the tip of the nose had been burnt to a cinder; one ear frizzled, the other charred; the eyes had been reduced to a decomposed black mass, and the eyebrows were completely gone. The nosebones were unusually prominent. On the back of the head there lay a quantity of hair - long, as is usually worn by women, matted together with decomposed matter. The hair was of dark brown colour, and very fine. Over the right eyebrow was an irregular cut, about an inch long, with ragged edges, it reached the bone. A most remarkable thing was that the back of the neck (muscles) was white and fresh; the edges, where the separation between this part and the neck and chest portion had been made, were regular and uncharred, but sufficiently decomposed to prevent the discovery as to whether the act was clean or not. There could be no doubt, however, that the separation had been accomplished by some cutting instrument. To the base of the skull was attached the first bone of the neck, above referred to as being absent from the trunk portion of the remains. This bone (the atlas) was preserved, marked C, and was handed to the police. On it were some slight incisions near the tubercle on the right articular surface, on the inside of the left half of the posterior portion of the body at its centre, and on the upper outer margin of the posterior right half of the body. These incisions were similar in character to those already referred to as found on the first vertebra (axis) attached to the other portion of the remains. The examination of the internal parts of the head was next carried out. After making the usual incision across the scalp, a large fracture of the cranial bones in the left temporal region was found.
    Over the bones in this region there was a large deep red stain of dried blood, and the cranial soft parts covering the temporal and lower parietal regions were of deep red colour, from the ecchymosis of blood. The scalp here was separated from the bone. The fracture permitted observation of the parts within the cranial cavity; here the membranes enclosed the putrid brain substances and lay like a bag on the base of the cranium. The brain substance escaped from the base externally. The head itself (cranium) was of small size. The bones were rather thin. The diploe was imperfect, but yet generally present. The fracture above referred to was next carefully examined. At the posterior inferior portion of the left parietal bone a triangular piece of the skull bone, its base being two and a half inches long, was forced in on the cranial cavity. From the centre of the equamous portion of the left temporal bone another oblong piece, about one inch and a quarter long in its greatest length, had been loosened. The fracture itself passed from the superior angles of the triangular piece above referred to, to the coronal suture, which itself had been separated for two inches; then from it, through the parietal bone of the right side to the equamous portion of the right temporal bone, and across the basilar portion of the sphenoid and between the clinoid processes irregularly to the root of the zygoma; and thence back to the anterior inferior angle of the triangular piece. Several other fractures in the bones passed off from the main fracture in its course. A preparation of the cranium exhibiting these injuries was made (marked A), and delivered to the police. In the upper jaw all the teeth were perfect on the left side, excepting that the first bicisor was wanting and the second incisor was decayed, while on the right side all the teeth were present except the first bicuspid, the first molar, and the wisdom tooth. In the lower jaw, which was prepared for preservation, and given with other exhibits to the police, there were on each side two incisors, one canine, one bicuspid tooth, the bicuspid tooth on the left side being decayed. The other eight teeth, four on each side, at the back of the jaw, had been extracted a long time, and the rami were smooth, and without any socket marks. The angle of the lower jaw was about 120 degrees. Lastly, the piece of cloth formerly referred to as having been brought to the dead house with the human remains, was washed in hot and cold water (but yet continued much marked with blood stains and stains of decomposed matter), and given to the police. I considered its preservation a matter of great importance, inasmuch as it was a portion of the chemise of a female, and the cloth was twilled calico, a material not customarily employed by females in this country for underclothing. The sewing on it also appeared to be peculiar. The edges of the piece of cloth were jagged and irregular, and it had evidently been cut with a knife. And a portion of the hair was also preserved and placed in the hands of the police. The above appearances furnished the following conclusions regarding the identity of the body, and the time, cause, and mode of death. First, that the remains were the portion of the body of a female with small head. There was but little hair on the upper part of the head, but it must be remembered that this part of the scalp had been subjected to the action of fire. The molar or cheek bone was very prominent. The nose was prominent at the bridge, and was long, and probably of the shape commonly termed Roman or aquiline. The hair was fine, dark brown in colour, and only moderately long. The forehead slightly receding. The age between 25 and 35 years. Secondly. That death occurred probably within a fortnight before the time when the remains were found. Thirdly. That the injuries above described on the head were inflicted during life, and would cause death almost immediately on their infliction; that these injuries had been inflicted by one or more blews with some heavy blunt instrument, as the back of an axe. Fourthly. That the body had been deprived of its limbs and had been dissected, and that the proofs of identity and the traces of the dissection had been obscured by charring with ordinary fire. The fire had probably been a small one, none of the bone substance having been burnt, while the flesh around had been charred. The dissection had unquestionably been performed by a person having some acquaintance with anatomy, and exhibits a certain degree of skill, especially in the mode in which the neck had been severed; in other words, it is such a dissection as would be performed by a butcher. At the request of the police I have inspected a house in Sussex street, in this city, numbered 397, and adjoining the store of J.R. Linsley, for the purpose of examining certain stains and spots on the floor of the upper front room overlooking Sussex street. The floor was of deal wood. The stains were chiefly found on the floor near the windows and between the north and south walls and they had plainly been erased to some extent by washing. Nevertheless they were well marked. They were of dark appearance and of various sizes, some being as large as a shilling, others as large as a crown piece, while others were as large as both hands placed together. These latter were observed on that part of the floor between the windows and near the east wall. Several of these spots I marked, and requested senior-sergeant Taylor to remove for further examination, and I afterwards received from him a number of fine scrapings said to have been removed from the floor at those places, but as their removal had not been effected in such a manner as to admit of ready and efficient testing I went again to the house, and in the presence of Mrs Orr, the proprietress, I removed, in a form suited for the application of tests, portions of the floor with stains on them in the locality already referred to. These fragments I have tested chemically in the usual manner, and from them I have obtained the appearances peculiar to the colouring matter of the blood. I have also examined portions of these stains under the microscope, and I have observed the discs found in blood; these fragments stained with bleed, I now exhibit, marked AA; one of these slicings of the floor I also exhibit, marked BB; on it the stain can be positively identified by its physical characters as a blood stain. I exhibit also another slicing removed from the surface of the floor, near the above, marked CC, on which is a stain recognisable by the naked eye as blood, and dried animal exudation matter. At the Central Police Office I was shown by inspector Read several pieces of twilled calico, which I identified as precisely similar in character to the piece (portion of a chemise) I have already stated to have been brought to the dead house of the Benevolent Asylum with the human remains; a large piece of canvas, with a stain on it, passing through the substance of the cloth was also shown to me, and I identified the stain from its physical character as a blood stain. A bed mattress with a stain on it was also shown to me, and I received a piece of the stained cloth from senior sergeant Waters for further examination. On this piece now produced, and marked DD, I found the stain to pass through the substance of the cloth; on being submitted to a chemical and microscopical examination, it proved to be a blood stain. Since then, senior sergeants Taylor and Waters submitted to my inspection a piece of blue blanket, a blue blanket, and a brown blanket, on which I observed several large stains, and a few smaller ones, all of which had evidently been much erased by washing. From these articles I removed portions of the stained cloth, which I now produce, marked EE, FF, GG, and HH. I have examined these exhibits chemically, but there is so much colouring matter in their substance that the discovery of blood, if present, is by it quite obscured. Equally unsatisfactory results were obtained with the microscope, except in the case of exhibit HH, a piece of brown blanket, on which there is a dark spot, a portion of which under the microscope exhibited blood globules, pigment cells &c. In performing the above experiments pure reagents were in every case employed, and all sources of fallacy avoided. The blood globules seen by the aid of the microscope in the portions of the exhibits now produced are unquestionably the globules of the blood of a mammalian animal. I decline to state positively that they are the globules of human blood. There is, however, nothing in their size or shape contradictory to the supposition that they are the globules of human blood. Early in the morning of Monday, 22nd October, 1866 senior sergeants Taylor and Waters brought to the dead house of the Benevolent Asylum certain human remains in a deal shell, which shortly afterwards I examined. They consisted of the skin and muscular substance of a human body artistically cut up into various portions, together with a pelvis having two lumbar verfebrea attached, and two upper extremities (right and left) with one thigh bone (right), and two lower legs (right and left). All these portions had undergone decomposition to a certain extent but from having Iain under water - as their appearance plainly indicated - this process had not gone so far as would otherwise have been the case. They were all evidently parts of the same body, and could be fitted together. The muscular portions consisted, in separate parts of the right and left breasts and sides, the right and left loins, the abdominal walls equally divided, the flesh on the pubes wiih hair on it (mens veneris), the right and left hips, and the muscular substance of the back in two pieces (right and left.) There were also some pieces of the lungs, liver, and heart. The limbs had all been separated at the joints, and were all covered with skin (epidermis absent) and muscular substance, except the thigh bone, on which only a portion of the muscle remained. The toes and fingers had been gnawed by rats or cats, and portions of the distal joints removed. The extremities corresponded to the right and left sides of the same body. The pelvis had the shape and characteristics peculiar to the female sex. To determine whether these remains belonged to the same body as those I have already described as having been brought to the dead house of the Benevolent Asylum on the 18th September, I advised the exhumation of the latter. On the 22nd October I saw the same deal coffin containing the chest and other human remains which had been brought to the dead house on the 18th September, exhumed in the Roman Catholic burial-ground in Devonshire street, senior sergeant Taylor also being present. I gave instructions for their removal to the dead house of the Asylum, where, on the same day, I proceeded to compare the two series of remains. On this occasion a butcher's steel was shewn to me by sergeant Taylor and I compared it with the circular hole which I formerly described as having been found in the chest portion of the first series of remains. From the comparison, I satisfied myself that the instrument referred to, or a similar one, would occasion such a hole as there existed. Allowing for difference of circumstances, the extent of the process of decomposition in the muscles of the neck, found on the back of the head portion of the first series of remains and that of the soft parts of the second series was very similar. The dislocation and separation at the joints had been similarly performed in both series, and the disjointed parts fitted well together. The soft parts, already described as having been dissected from the remains first brought to the dead house, and at that time missing, were all represented in the remains brought on this second occasion. The hair on the pubes and in the axilla, brought on the second occasion, was similar in colour, only a little lighter, to that found on the head portion of the remains first brought. And lastly, the chest or trunk portion of the first series terminated with the first three lumbar vertebrae, while on the pelvis brought with the second series the other two lumbar vetebra were attached, the separated intervetebra surfaces being precisely similar in appearance, and corresponding exactly. There could be no doubt, therefore, that both series of remains belonged to the same female body. The examination of the second series of remains confirmed the opinion already stated that death had occurred within a fortnight of the time of the original finding. It also confirmed all the particulars stated regarding the mode of dissection and the identity of the body. The only additional points of identity they revealed were, first, the height of the body, as determined by apposition of the parts, which were found to be about five feet seven inches, secondly, the existence of a warty mole or similar mark, about the size of the point of the little finger, on the right forearm, over the radial portion, and about four inches from the wrist, thirdly the well- developed muscular system of the limbs and body, which is a remarkable peculiarity when contrasted with the small size of the head. They also confirmed the opinion that tho dissection had been performed by a butcher or a person of similar occupation. This piece of cloth (exhibit B) is the piece of twilled calico referred to in my evidence as having been brought to me with the body; I examined the axe produced; it is stained with blood, and is such an instrument as would inflict such a fracture as I have spoken of; the skull (exhibit E) is that I have spoken of; such an injury as I have described would produce almost if not quite, immediate death - at most, a few seconds after the infliction; the blow, no doubt, was given during life, it is not likely that a person could scream after receiving such a blow, the upper jaw is in the same state, as to teeth, as when I first examined it, but a tooth, nearly opposite, in the lower jaw, has fallen out since, this is the hair (exhibit F) I cut from the head.
    By Mr Pinhey; The charring was so general on the head and the chest that there is some probability in the supposition that the parts may have been placed in red hot cinders, if any were found in the locality.
    By Mr Thompson; After such a wound as that inflicted on the head there was no necessity, in order to kill, to have recourse to either a bullet or a steel; such a hole as I have described in the side may have been caused by a red hot poker.
    Mr Windeyer; That is the case, your Worship.
    Mr Pinhey; William Henry Scott, having heard the evidence, do you wish to say anything in answer to the charge? You are not obliged to say anything unless you desire to do so , but whatever you say will be taken down in writing, and may be given in evidence against you upon your trial. You have nothing to hope from any promise of favour, and nothing to fear from any threat, which may have been holden out to you to make any admission or confession of your guilt, but whatever you may now say may be given in evidence against you upon your trial, notwithstanding any such promise or threat.
    Prisoner; I have confidence in my attorney - I leave it to him.
    Mr Pinhey; I have given this case that solemn consideration which by virtue of my office I was bound to do.
    I have taken down the evidence in extenso, so that no one point of the same should slip my observation or recollection. I find, upon weighing the evidence, and putting together the fragmentary portions thereof, that there is a case such as it is my duty to send to another Court. I therefore commit you, William Henry Scott, to take your trial at the ensuing sessions of the Central Criminal Court, for the wilful murder of your wife, Anne Scott. His Worship added; In closing this case - perhaps the most lengthy, tedious, intricate, and, I may add, in our annals of crime, unprecedented case - I feel it incumbent upon me to take this opportunity of stating that great praise is due to the officers and men in the police force for the tact, discernment, and unwearied diligence displayed by them, showing an amount of discipline and love of duty creditable alike to all concerned.
    The prisoner was then removed.15
  • 23 Nov 1866: On the 31st ultimo, William Henry Scott was committed, at the Central Police Court, to take his trial at the next sessions of the Criminal Court for the murder of his wife.16
  • 21 Feb 1867: CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. WEDNESDAY.
    BEFORE Mr Justice CHEEKE.
    MURDER
    William Henry Scott was indicted for that he did, at Sydney, on the 6th of September last, feloniously, wilfully, and of his malice aforethought, kill and murder one Annie Scott.
    The case for the prosecution was conducted by the Solicitor-General (Mr Isaacs), the prisoner was defended by Mr Dalley and Mr Healley, instructed by his attorney Mr. Thompson.
    The SOLICITOR-GENERAL, opened the case for the Crown in a speech occupying more them three hours in its delivery, in the course of which that learned gentleman recapitulated the leading facts, upon the significance of which the prisoner stood before the Court charged with the capital crime set forth in the indictment just read. After some preliminary observations the Solicitor-General called upon the jury to approach the consideration of this case in a calm, dispassionate spirit, fully resolved to be guided in their decision by the nature of the evidence which would be set before them, so that the law might be vindicated, and justice done. He should endeavour to call their attention to the salient points of the case as disclosed in the investi-gation which had taken place, and, in so doing, should do his best to keep his mind clear of any feelings which might naturally be evoked by the heinous nature of the crime of which the unhappy man before them was accused. From his Honor the jury would have the benefit of a judicial decision on such qwuestions of law as might incidentally arise, and of an authoritative settlement of such questions as those in which law and fact were intermingled. On the part of the prisoner it might be observed that he had the advantage of having secured the aid of very able counsel, in the persons of those two gentle-men who had kindly undertaken to conduct his defence. The evidence for the Crown which they would have to consider, would, he believed, be found to prove of a reliable character, the verity and unprejudiced nature of which it would not be possible to impugn. And first, he would premise that it was a case in which there was, in the strictest sense of the term, no direct evidence against the prisoner, although there was, nevertheless, a considerable body of evidence to incriminate him, some of the circumstances being of such a nature as very strongly pointed to his conviction. No human eye had, it was true, seen the man strike the fatal blow which killed the deceased woman, but a variety of the circumstances that were to be disclosed in evidence tended irresistibly to prove the prisoner's guilt. It would appear that, on Saturday, the 15th of December last, a young lad named Kirkpatrick had discovered some human remains in the neighbourhood of Barker's Mills, near Sussex street. When in that immediate neighbour-hood his attention had been attracted by his dog scratching at a rubbish heap, in which heap he found the said remains. On the Tuesday previous he had seen some flesh and bones, but supposing what he saw to be part of some animal infe-rior to man, he did not then regard the remains with much attention. Subsequently, however, on the above named date, he discovered in that spot a human head, and this dis-covery was immediately reported to the police, by whom further search was made. The remains were placed in a shell, and subsequently examined by Dr Renwick, whose evidence they would hear. The remains were too much de-composed to allow of any recognition of the features. Nor was it by ordinary decomposition alone that their identification was rendered difficult, they had evidently undergone the action of fire, and had the odour of baked meat. Dr, Renwick would inform them of the conclusions he had arrived at. Sergeant Waters would also state to them that a piece of linen, of a peculiar kind, had been found with the remains, this linen, which had been soiled and washed, evidently having formed part of the chemise of a woman. The linen was of the description of twilled calico a material not commonly made use of for chemises, and would be found exactly to correspond with the material, in which there was also some peculiar style of sewing, known to have been used in the making of a chemise and drawers worn by the deceased woman, Annie Scott .So far there was a prima facie case of the murder of a female by some-body. The two questions were-Whose body was it that was found; And who was the party by whom the murder had been committed? In their laudable efforts to solve this first question the police had been exceedingly active, and a vast mass of evidence had been collected with a view to the identification of the body of the person murdered. Evidence would be adduced to prove that there was every reason to believe that the deceased was the person who had lived with Scott as his wife "Annie" - married, as it would appear, to him, William Henry Scott, in St Paul's Church, Ipswich, under the maiden name of "Annie Ramsay. " By certain personal marks the womans body would be identified. The learned counsel then went on to give an outline of the chain of evidence adduced at the Police Office, which showed that a leg and arm and other portions of a human body had been found - after the dis-covery of the head and other remains - in a privy off Kent street. Subsequently the lower part of a second leg and other pieces of human flesh were found in emptying the same receptacle. These additional pieces of the body were put by the police into a box and taken away to the dead house of the Benevolent Asylum. From the remains first discovered in the rubbish heap near Barker's Mills, and those subsequently found in the water closet off Sussex-street, it was found that the entire body of a female could be reconstructed, and that there was every reason to believe that all the different pieces had been parts of the body of one and the same individual. A Mr and Mrs Trevillien, who had known "Annie" (the person who passed as the wife of William Henry Scott), visited the dead house, and identified the remains as the woman's body by means of a mole or wart on the outer side of the right arm. This mark in this place they had had ample opportunity of observing when the Annie Scott was alive, and they easily recognised it after her death. The jaw in the head found in the rubbish showed also a tooth to be wanting in the same place in the month in which such a loss had been ob-served in the mouth of Annie Scott. There was, more-over, at the back of the jaw some teeth which appeared to have been wanting for several years before death, and it was remembered by witnesses who spoke to the fact that there was a "falling in" of the cheek of Annie Scott corresponding thereto. The nasal bone of the head found was also peculiarly prominent, and the nose of Annie Scott was distinctly stated to be of such a kind as might be surmised from an inspection of the bone referred to. "Annie" was stated to have had a " Roman" nose -some had described it as " Jewish." The hair on the head found would be produced, and it would be stated to be of a similar character to that of Annie Scott. Some had thought it rather lighter, but supposing the hair, as they remembered it, to have been oiled, the slight (supposed) difference of tint would be fully accounted for. There were also a variety of other physical appearances in the remains deputed to by the medical witness by which that witness had been enabled to surmise what must have been the appear-ance of the deceased person when living, and it was remarkable that what the medical witness thought to be so indi-cated exactly corresponded with the appearance of Annie Scott, as remembered by several witnesses. Passing onto other means of identification, there were several boxes claimed by the prisoner, containing apparel belonging to the deceased Annie Scott. In these were a white mohair bonnet, a blue silk dress, a boa, and other peculiar articles of dress such as Annie Scott was remembered to have worn. Evidence of identi-fication was further furnished (in addition to the above mentioned articles of apparel), by what was called " an imitation coral necklace" which the woman, to whom they were now making special reference, used to wear '' in three twists" round her neck. This necklace was found in one of the boxes claimed by the prisoner after the assumed death of his wife. There was also a japanned case in which the woman was stated to have kept her bonnet. The "box" principally referred to was distinctly shewn to have been in prisoners possession, and had been tracked to a number of different places. It was known to have been repainted by the prisoner himself so as to alter its appear-ance ; he had been seen personally engaged in repainting it. Two young lads would be called upon to give important evidence which bore upon the prisoner's possession of this box and the use to which he had put it. The first of the two that would be called upon would be a boy named Weekes, who had assisted the prisoner to carry such a box along the street at night - prisoner going and taking the box so carried from out of a house in Sussex street, in which he had been residing. There was no light in the house at the time that the man got out the box which the boy Weekes had been asked to assist him in carrying up the street. The same boy spoke to the existence of a very bad odour in the house as prisoner went in, and to the witness noticing such an odour to have come from the box : itself. The boy thought the stench was like the odour of a dead body, which it appeared he had particularly noticed when there had been two deaths in his family. The prisoner seemed to be in a hurry, and attributed the smell to the alleged circumstances that the box contained "a lot of corned beef." Prisoner said that he was going with the box to the New Company's Wharf, and they pro-ceeded some way, but the boy got frightened, and his sus-picions being excited, he said he could not carry the box any further because of its weight. The prisoner, there-upon, as it was stated, left the boy Weekes and got another boy, named Fitzpatrick, from the bar of a neighbour-ing public-house to help him. This boy at prisoner's request, helped him to carry the box - then of a grained oak colour with iron handles - along Sussex-street as far as Liverpool-street. [The learned counsel here proceeded minutely to detail the progress taken by the prisoner and the boy Fitzpatrick with the box, down Liverpool-street to the wharf at the lower end of it - to describe what was done and said there; how the box was again brought by the prisoner back to Sussex-street, and along Sussex-street as far as North street.] At North-street the prisoner put the box down and carried it into a yard at the back of Kelly's public house, where the boy Fitzpatrick, who left the prisoner, saw the box for the last time. The learned counsel here minutely detailed the circumstances attendant upon this part of the carrying of the box in Fitzpatrick's company ; the stench of its contents ; and the expressions used by the prisoner in regard to what oozed out of the box. The fact that the boys both swore positively to the prisoner was also remarked upon. Counsel also dwelt on peculiarity of the linen (in other boxes) known to belong to de-ceased, and the identity of such linen with linen found with the upper part of the body.
    Reference was also made to other linen supposed to belong to deceased which prisoner was known to have pawned. This having been commented upon the Solicitor-General proceeded to refer to evidence of witnesses brought into more direct contact with prisoner. This would be the main body of the evidence to be insisted upon. And first the learned gentleman recapitulated main features of what would, as he was instructed, be proved by evidence of Mrs. Orr, who had given evidence against the prisoner at the in-vestigation at the Police Court. [Reference was here, for the first time, made to models of certain houses and tene-ments especially referred to by this and by other witnesses, in regard to events happening in the house where Scott lived with his wife Annie, in Sussex-street and elsewhere.] Mrs Orr did not give certain evidence as to the prisoner's having brought boxes with him when he came to live in the house which he took of her, near her own residence in Sussex-street South, but she would state that she remembered a particular box which he had when he was her tenant and afterwards. The box she remembered was described by her as resembling the one which would be produced. [The Solicitor-General went on to detail, at a great length, the particulars of Mrs. Orr's, evi-dence - the three visits of the prisoner when he came alone about the taking of the house before he did take it, and what he said to her on those occasions.] It was on the 20th of August that the woman (said by prisoner to be his wife, who had arrived from Melbourne) paid the first week's rent, Mrs. Orr described her as being a tall well-made woman, with a high-bridged, well-shaped nose, hollow cheeks, and dark brown hair. She stated also that the woman wanted one of her front teeth, and that she frequently put her hand to her month as if to hide the loss of har tooth. There would be evidence to show that this woman was distinctly recognized by Scott as his wife. It would also come out in evidence that the woman must have been in Miss Grant's service at the precise time that the prisoner had given Mrs. Orr the false account of her being, at that time, at Melbourne. This the Solicitor-General felt to be a not insignificant incident in the case. Mrs. Orr never saw the woman she knew as "Annie," or "Mrs. Scott," after the 5th of September last. The Solicitor General then entered into a detail of the circumstances to be proved in evidence for the Crown as to the proceedings of prisoner after the 6th of December, when he said, " his wife was gone away"-but when he nevertheless still re-tained possession of the house. The learned gentleman said it would be shewn that he had cleaned up the house ; that he had stowed away certain boxes in Mrs. Orr's cellar; and that he was seen wiping out certain spots on the floor of the house he had occupied with his wife - the very spot where the police had afterwards found traces of blood. There was also evidence that would be given by another witness as to the fastening up of a tablecloth on some particular day to prevent a room in prisoner's house from being overlooked by the neighbours. Mrs Trevillien would prove that she had heard very early one morning a heavy noise as of something falling, the noise being followed by dull sounds as if blows on something on the floor had been struck, and a " dragging or a scraping" on the floor afterwards in the next house. She heard no screams, and the medical testimony would go to show that when once struck, as was here supposed, there would be no power left to scream. This witness did not see Mrs. Scott after that. Her evidence as to the noise she had heard was corroborated by Mrs. Craig, who lived in the same house. Mrs. Craig had heard the woman sobbing violently on a previous occasion. The Solicitor-General also referred in more general terms to the number of different lodgings that prisoner kept on at one and the same time ; and evidence as to washing of blood-stained clothes, which prisoner accounted for by stating what was expressly contradicted by evidence ; to the marked change in prisoners demeanour after the supposed murder; and to his carrying about in his pocket a pistol and poison (prussic acid). The evidence of Robert Sylvester, at the Police Court, as to the "Kangaroo"-the woman who came to speak to prisoner at his place of business (presumed to be "Annie") - to the prisoner's expression that he "had made away with the Kangaroo ; " and to his passionate ex-clamation-"My God, My God! I can neither sleep, nor rest, night or day," and to other suspicious circumstances. The Solicitor-General also touched upon the principal features of the evidence which had been given at the Police Court by a witness named Franklin, in which there was men-tion made of an alleged quarrel between prisoner and the woman, Annie Scott. All these several points - taken to-gether - had a bearing on the case and were decidedly most unfavourable in respect of the charge against the prisoner. The fineness of the woman's hair, which was spoken of by all the female witnesses, was alluded to by- Dr. Renwick, whose testimony was very valuable, and who came to the following conclusion, judging from the appearances that presented themselves to his notice - First, that the remains were those of a female with a small head, fine brown hair, a long Reman nose, a slightly receding forehead, and aged about 35 years; second, that death had occurred probably a fortnight before the discovery of the remains; third, that the injuries to the head were inflicted during life, would cause death immediately, and had been inflicted with some heavy blunt instrument " such as the back of an axe ;" fourth, that the body had been deprived of limbs and dissected, and the proofs of dissection obscured by charring with fire, the fire being probably a small one, none of the bones having been burnt, and the dissection having been performed by some person having some acquaintance with anatomy, and was such a dissection as might have been performed by a butcher. Dr. Renwick would also state that he had examined stains found on the floor of the house where Scott lived, and proved them to be stains of blood. He would also state that certain pieces of calico and other stuff traced to prisoner were stained with blood. Then as to the reconstruction of the body Dr. Renwick would give the following evidence.
    That gentleman had said :
    To determine whether these remains belonged to the same body as those I have already described as having been brought to the dead house of the Benevolent Asylum on the 18th September, I advised the exhumation of the latter. On the 22nd October I saw the same deal coffin containing the chest and other human remains which had been brought to the dead-house on the 18th September, exhumed in the Roman Catholic burial-ground in Devonshire-street, senior sergeant Taylor also being present. I gave instructions, for their removal to the dead-house of the Asylum where on the same day, I proceeded to compare the two series of remains. On this occasion a butcher's steel was shown to me by sergeant Taylor, and I compare it with the circular hole which I formerly described as having been found in the chest portion of the first series of remains. From the comparison, I satisfied myself that the instrument referred to, or a similar one, would occasion such a hole as there existed. Allowing for difference of circumstances the extent of the process of decomposition in the muscles of the neck, found on the back of the head portion of the first series of remains, and that of the soft parts of the second series was very similar. The dislocation and séparation at the joints had been similarly performed in both series, and the disjointed parts fitted well together. The soft parts, already described as having been dissected from the remains first brought to the dead-house, and at that time [?] were all represented in the remains brought on this second occasion The hair on the pubes and in the axilla, brought on the second occasion, was similar in colour, only a little lighter, to that found on the head-portion of the remains first brought. And lastly, the chest or trunk portion of the first series terminated with the first three lumbar vertebrae; while on the pelvis brought with the second series the other two lumbar vertebra were attached, the separated intervettbral surfaces being precisely similar in appearance, and corresponding exactly. There could be no doubt, therefore, that both series of remains belonged to the same female body. The examination of the second series of remains confirmed the opinion already stated that death had occurred within a fortnight of the time of the original finding. It also confirmed all the particulars stated regarding the mode of dissec-tion and the identity of the body. The only additional points of identity they repealed were, first, the height of the body, as determined by apposition of the parts, which was found to be about five feet seven inches ; secondly, the existence of a warty mole or similar mark, about the size of the point of the little finger, on the right forearm, over the radial portion, and about four inches from the wrist ; thirdly, the well-developed muscular system of the limbs and body, which is a remarkable peculiarity when contrasted with the small size of the head. They also confirmed the opinion that the dissection had been performed by a butcher or a person of similar occupation. This piece of cloth (exhibit B) is the piece of twilled calico referred to in my evidence as having been brought to me with the body; I examined the axe produced ; it is stained with blood, and is such an instrument as would inflict such a fracture as I have spoken of; the skull (exhibit E) is that I have spoken; such an injury as I have described would produce almost, if not quite, immediate death-at most, a few seconds after the infliction ; the blow no doubt, was given during life ; it is not likely that a person could scream after receiving such a blow ; the upper jaw is in the same state, as to teeth, as when I first examined it, but a tooth, nearly opposite, in the lower jaw, has fallen out since; this is the hair (exhibit F) I cut from the head.
    The learned gentleman then observed that he had gone through all the salient points of the evidence to be, adduced for the prosecution, and he thought if those points were fully established they would go far in proof of the charge against the prisoner at the bar. He lamented the inadequacy of his talents to the performance of the onerous' duty before him, and, enjoining the jury to deal impar-tially and carefully with the prisoner according to the evidence, he concluded as follows -.-" The fate of this unhappy man is in your hands. It is not for me to say what the effect of the evidence against him is on my' mind. You have nothing to do with that; You are the sole judges of the effect of that evidence as regards the fate of the prisoner. Some persons may think him guilty ; some may think him innocent; some may think, his guilt not proven. But upon you will devolve the duty of pronouncing the verdict that will either consign him to ignominious death on the scaffold, or send him again abroad on society. I have no doubt you will listen with all care to the evidence, and I pray to God that you may be guided to a right conclusion !"
    The evidence for the prosecution was then gone into, and the following witnesses were examined:-John M'Lerie, Inspector-General of Police ; Inspector George Read, senior sergeant Waters, senior sergeant Taylor, James Kirkpatrick, William Kirkpatrick, and Janet Orr. The evidence has already been so fully published that, its recapitulation is hardly necessary at this stage of the case. The trial will occupy some days, and his Honor announced yesterday that the Court would adjourn at 6 o'clock each evening until the case terminated.17
  • 22 Feb 1867: CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT. WEDNESDAY
    BEFORE his Honor Mr. Justice CHEEKE
    THE SUSSEX STREET MURDER
    The following is a summary of the evidence taken in the case of William Henry Scott, on Wednesday last. An abstract of the opening address of the prosecuting counsel, was published in yesterday's issue. The first witness called was John M'Lerie, Inspector-General of Police, who, being duly sworn, produced the articles exhibited at the Inquest held on the remains found; the skull produced was one of three articles, and since he received it, a tooth had dropped from the upper jaw, though he did not know on which side; the two pieces of calico produced were also exhibited at the inquest, and were both of the same texture, one piece (marked B) had been sent to him subsequent to the inquest; he also produced some hair; in the cellar of a house in Sussex street, belonging to Mrs Orr, he had found the piece of calico marked D, which was nearly bleached and of the same texture as exhibit B, and the axe pro-duced; Mrs Orr had handed him the steel produced; subsequent to these discoveries he had ordered the arrest of the prisoner; on examining the axe, at his office with a microscope he had detected spots of blood on the back of it, and the handle was stained with something that appeared to be blood; the marks on the axe head appeared to him like splashes of blood. On being cross examined by Mr. Dalley, the witness said he was merely giving his opinion as to the nature of the stains on the axe, and was aware that madder and other substances would make red stains of the same appearance.
    George Read inspector, attached to the Sydney Police Force, deposed to having seen the prisoner after his arrest, and asked him several questions, prefacing them with the usual caution as to the use which would be made of the answers thereto. The prisoner had answered these ques-tions for the most part promptly, but sometimes with hesi-tation, and his answers were to the effect that he had been living with a woman named Annie, who was not his wife, but that she had left him, and gone he knew not where, as he had made no inquiries about her; that she was about 25 or 26 years old, and about his own height, with a large head, a thin nose, and black hair, that he had met her some months ago in a lane near the Haymarket, and knew her by no other name than that of Annie. At another time, on being questioned by Mr. Read, the prisoner said that " he knew a woman named Reynolds, who was dead he believed, and that he met the woman he had been living with in Sussex-street in Queens-land two years ago ; that he was not exactly married to her but had taken her out one day and put a ring on her finger, and people believed they were married. The prisoner was sober but at times appeared affected, and on the night of his arrest he asked for a man to be allowed to stay in the cell with him. The witness further deposed that on Saturday, the 20th Octo-ber, he went to the house of a person named Marshall, in Phillip-street, and received from Mrs Marshall a shoe trunk (produced), which was in a back kitchen tied up with a piece of rope, and which contained a variety of articles, among others two chemises and two pairs of women's drawers. Witness had made an inventory of the contents of the box, which inventory was put in evidence. On com-paring the discoloured calico [exhibit B] with the chemises and drawers in the box, the material appeared to be the same in each, and pieces were let into the sides in a similar manner. The pieces so let in were the same in size and shape.
    James Kirkpatrick, the little boy who first discovered the remains which were found on a rubbish heap at the back of Barker's mills, was then examined. He detailed the circum stances of which he was cognisant, and mentioned that pre-vious to his discovering the remains, his little dog was in the habit of stopping at the place and scratching among the rubbish. He said that he had seen the ribs there for some days, but had thought them the remains of some animal, and had not until he saw the human head which was one day scratched up by his dog, suspected anything singular. On seeing the head however, he mentioned the matter to his father, who at once informed the police, and pointed out the remains to them. The boy stated that hot ashes were thrown on the rubbish heap where the remains were found several times a day, from the mill. He described the con-dition of the bones very carefully, stating that there was no hair on the top of the head, but only at the sides, its colour being dark brown, and that there was a little flesh on the ribs and skull.
    William Kirkpatrick, an iron moulder, the father of the last witness, corroborated his son's evidence as to the con-dition of the remains. He said that it was not until he saw the skull at the inquest he had noticed the loss of a tooth from the left side of the upper jaw; that there was a mark of a cut over the right eye, and that the ribs appeared to have been exposed to the sun for some days. From the testimony of the two police officers, senior sergeant Taylor, and senior sergeant Waters it appeared that the remains above re-ferred to were conveyed to the dead house on the day they were found. Round the trunk was a piece of twilled calico (marked B) not tied, but merely twisted loosely, and stained with blood. One edge of it appeared to have been cut with a knife. Other pieces of calico of the same kind, and bearing a close resemblance in texture to that found with the body, were discovered in boxes that were said to belong to the prisoner, and which, were found at Newland's public house where he had been lodging. These boxes were produced in court and inventories of their contents were put in evidence. Among other thing they contained, several articles of female wearing apparel; some chemises in particular the material and sewing of which corresponded precisely with the piece of twilled calico found with the remains. From Mrs Orr the person of whom the prisoner rented the house in Sussex street the police received a mattress and piece of canvass bloodstained, part of an iron bedstead, a steel and some cooking utensils. From a Mr Smith of Sussex street they got a bottle labelled chloroform. On the 21st of the month, a considerable time after the first discovery of the remains, the police discovered other portions of a human being in a water closet at the rear of Kelly's "Walter Scott" public house, Sussex street Out of this closet they took two arms, one thigh, two legs from the knee downwards, and several pieces of flesh - in all nineteen or twenty pieces, which were washed and sent to the dead house. This closet was a few yards from a spot pointed out to sergeant Waters by one Fitzpatrick, whose evidence will be found in another column. A large tin box, with a round topped lid thinly studded with nails, was taken from the prisoner's room in Mr Artlett's house, Rushcutter's Bay, by senior-sergeant Taylor. This box, which was a very peculiar looking one, being of somewhat odd construc-tion and shape, had the name of " Scott" scratched on the lid. It had been newly painted blue, and smelt strongly of the paint. The police officer on scraping a little of the fresh colour off found that the original colour of the box had been yellowish brown. This box also contained a number of articles of female apparel, of which a list was made. There were also in it a paper, the head of a pick, a broken lamp, two letters, and a pawn ticket. From Mr James's pawn office the police procured a bundle of things which had been pawned by Scott. Nearly all of these things were portions of female attire. Sergeant Taylor also obtained two blankets from a Mrs Smith, at whose house prisoner had lodged, and portions of those blankets bore stains which resembled blood. The prisoner said they were his. Stains of blood were found all over the rooms occupied by Scott in the house in Sussex-street. The remains found in the water closet were found to match those found in the rubbish, and out of the two series the body of a woman - perfect with the exception of one thigh - was reconstructed. There was a warty excrescence on the right arm of that body. Mrs Janet Orr, a widow lady residing in Sussex street, deposed to the prisoners having rented a house from her, and described the appearance of the women who passed as his wife. Mrs Orr saw that woman several times, and was able to speak as to her per-sonal looks very minutely, She described her as tall with dark brown hair, a long thin nose, and a small head. She also referred to the loss of a tooth, but said that it was gone from the right side of the woman's upper jaw. She detailed several conversations she had had with the prisoner and his wife, in the course of which they told her that they had been married in Brisbane four years ago, that Mrs Scott's name was Annie and that she had been in service at Miss Grant's. Mrs Orr last saw the woman on the night of the 5th September and never afterwards. She saw the prisoner two or three times after that, and he told her that his wife had left him, that he was going to the diggings, and a great many other things. He put a lot of things into Mrs Orr's cellar with her permission, and gave up the key of the house on the following day. Mrs Orr identified the axe and steel produced as having been in prisoners possession. She said he complained that his wife was dirty and lazy, and that he had been disappointed in marrying her and that she would not even wash him a shirt. "Here," he said, showing a bundle that he carried " are a pair of trousers that I am going to wash at Ude's. That was the last time that Mrs Orr saw the prisoner until she saw him in custody.
    The Court rose shortly before 6 o'clock.18
  • 26 Feb 1867: The Sydney Morning Herald. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 26 1867.
    If there is danger sometimes lest the impression that "murder will out", should lend to hasty conclusions in reference to the guilt of the accused, it is, after all, a salutary idea. In the administration of justice, those who are accustomed to sift evidence and to direct the course of a jury, are bound to guard against the effects of passion and prejudice.
    The recent trial, of course, has occupied universal attention. As it is now presented before us, it seems to remove all hesitation and doubt as to the guilt of the convict whose fate is in the hands of the Executive. Upon that fate we are not called upon to utter a word. It is, however, necessary for the efficacy of law and punishment that there should be a perfect conviction of the guilt of the offender in the community at large; and we propose to present, in the form of a simple narrative, the facts that are decisive.
    WILLIAM HENRY SCOTT, a butcher by trade, was married to ANNIE RAMSEY, in Queensland, in 1864, according to the rites of the Church of England. On the 16th March, 1866, he married EMMA BYER at Melbourne according to the rites of the Lutheran Church. On the 5th August, 1866 he hired a house belonging to MRS JANET ORR in Sussex street, Sydney, the scene of the murder. To this house, ANNIE SCOTT accompanied him. Mrs Orr saw the deceased on the 5th September for the last time. Two days after SCOTT called and asked if the house had been let. Mrs ORR replied, " How could I let the house when you had the key?" She also asked, "Where is she?" (meaning deceased.) SCOTT replied, "She is gone."
    He, however, retained the key. On the 9th September, prisoner came to Mrs ORR'S house when she asked him, "Where is your wife?" or some such words and he replied that she was somewhere about Redfern. On the 10th he gave to Mrs ORR the key and several articles, as a butcher's steel and axe. He then said he had made a mistake in marrying his wife - that he thought she was a clean industrious girl and found she was not. It was proved that correspondence had taken place between SCOTT and his unlaw-ful wife at Melbourne. A letter was produced in his handwriting to her giving an account of his proceedings, excusing his sending no money, and saying that he hoped in a short time they would be together. On the 12th September, 1866, this poor woman implored him to disclose to her whether he intended to return or not, con-cluding "your affectionate wife, EMMA SCOTT." A letter was found on the prisoner addressed to her containing professions of love and saying that he meant to go to Victoria in a few weeks, but that if she wanted to come to Sydney for a week or two he would send the money. Thus two separate applications had been made to him by his Melbourne wife, under date 11th June and 12th September, and the invitation to Sydney and the promise of future residence in Melbourne was made on 7th October, about one month after the disappearance of ANNIE SCOTT.
    During this month a series of events happened in perfect harmony with the position of SCOTT as a man upon whom weighed the responsibility and guilt of bigamy. The dis appearance of his wife, ANNIE SCOTT, would certainly not justify an inference that he had destroyed her, but there was nothing to lead to the idea that she had voluntarily quitted him. Almost every article of wearing apparel known to belong to her was discovered in possession of the prisoner or in the hands of persons with whom he had deposited them. It is impossible to suppose that a person voluntarily leaving her home, and in such circum stances, being the wife of the party forsaken, would have left behind her all her known apparel; and the inference therefore to be drawn with almost absolute certainty, is that the person who held that apparel had been cog-nisant of her disappearance and a party to it.
    What became of her? A little dog tore up from a dust heap the remains of the woman. The head attracted the attention of a boy. The constabulary came to the search. They afterwards found at a distance, in a water closet, the other parts of the body of a woman. In comparing the various parts they discovered that the process of dissection had been by a practised hand. When the parts were all collected, the height and frame were clearly made out. The witness who described ANNIE SCOTT said that she was a woman of large frame; that her head was small, that her nose was prominent, or Roman; that she was about thirty or thirty-five years of age, that she had a mole on her arm that she had lost a tooth. In all these particulars the remains answered to the description of ANNIE SCOTT. The smallness of her head and her particular outline gave her that appearance which led the workmen of RICE to call her "the kangaroo". In the evidence of the skilful medical man by whom these fragments were brought together and examined, a wound was found in the skull sufficient to cause instantaneous death, and a wound had been inflicted in the breast by some round instrument such as a butcher's steel. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the remains found, though thus divided, belonged to one body, and that they were the body of a person violently deprived of life.
    But what a series of facts are accumulated in the united testimony of all these witnesses to point to the actual murderer, Various witnesses state that ANNIE SCOTT was heard to be sobbing bitterly; that on the supposed night of the murder a dull blow was heard by the next door neighbours; that something heavy was heard dragged along the floor; that SCOTT was afterwards seen to be wiping up what is proved to be blood , that his clothes were saturated with blood , that at night he was seen when carrying some substance in a state of decomposition near the place where a part of the remains were afterwards found.
    There was, however, one important link besides in proving the identity of the body.
    Attached was a fragment of some remarkable twill stiched in a particular way and answering to the work and to the garment of ANNIE SCOTT.
    It is deplorable to think that after such an accumulation of evidence SCOTT solemnly protested his innocence. It was the duty of the gentlemen who so liberally performed the office of counsel to put everything in favour of the prisoner as strongly as possible to explain the facts against him, or to suggest a doubt of his guilt. It would, indeed, be useless to place them in their position if they were to withhold any suggestion which might admit the alternative of innocence, because behind all they might have themselves the strong conviction of guilt. WE could hardly suppose that any one in court doubted that the prisoner was the cause of the death of ANNIE SCOTT, or the motive he had in putting her to death, or the means by which it had been accomplished, or the plan he had pursued for the concealment of his deed. All these things are transparent. It was an awful thing indeed to hear that guilty man, condemned so justly protesting his innocence and heaping reproach upon the witnesses, and crying out, "The Almighty, before whom I stand, can bear witness that I am not guilty of this horrible crime". Such protestations, even on the scaffold, will have no weight with those who are acquainted with the conduct of many criminals. LEVY lately executed at New Zealand passed out of the world with assertions of his innocence, although a clandestine letter to an accomplice admitted no other conclusion than his guilt. It is difficult to know in what way such beings reconcile together their belief in a judgment to come and their assertions in the presence of the Great Judge of innocence in the face of the clearest proofs. Probably there is some process of reasoning known to uncultured and demoralised minds, by which some little discrepancy between the evidence and fact is made to invalidate, in their view, the whole verdict, and to admit of their solemn and final denial of its truth.
    While we are not insensible to the meritorious efforts of the police, and the care and skill of the prosecution, we are quire disposed to recognise the finger of God. This unhappy man enveloped his crime in mystery. He thought to escape detection in the shades of darkness and under the veil of artifices skilfully planned. But there was an Eye upon him -he felt its power - it was sending its terrors into his soul and making all his measures for safety means of detection or conviction. Every movement fastened upon him more fully the proofs of guilt, until his iniquity in its appalling magnitude was open to the light of day, and became irresistible and overwhelming. CHRONOLOGY is but the skeleton of history. The bare facts and figures of a public man's life give but a poor account of it. Still they make a framework, and lay a basis for the subsequent filling in of the picture.19
  • 6 Mar 1867: NEW SOUTH WALES. (From the Sydney Morning Herald.)
    THE SUSSEX-STREET MURDER. The trial of William Henry Scott, for the murder of Annie Scott, begun on Wednesday, 20th ult., before Mr Justice Cheeke and a common jury, and, after a long and patient hearing, terminated on Friday night in the conviction of the accused, on whom sentence of death was passed in impressive language by the learned Judge. The unhappy culprit preserved throughout the trial the same unmoved demeanour which had characterised him from the commencement, and only betrayed a slight emotion when the jury returned into court at nine o'clock, after the absence of an hour. Upon hearing the terrible verdict he protested his entire innocence with solemn emphasis, but with a recklessness of manner that painfully impressed all present. As he was removed from the court, the poor young woman whom he seems to have betrayed into a bigamous marriage, threw herself on the bench where she had been sitting for some hours, and wept bitterly. During the absence of the jury, the excitement amongst the crowd in the court became most intense, and as his Honor remarked, when he reappeared on the Bench, the place had been more like a theatre than a court of justice. It was with difficulty, even after that observation, that quiet could be preserved during the passing of the last dread sentence of the law. The jury seised of this most important and extra-ordinary case, have obviously paid great attention to its multiform details. The jurors were of course detained within the precincts of the court since the commencement of the trial, but under the care of Mr. Deputy Sheriff Uhr, their personal comfort was carefully attended to, so far as was consistent with the necessary restraints incidental to their responsible position and temporary seclusion.
    William Henry Scott, a butcher by trade, was married to Annie Ramsay, in Queensland, in 1864, according to the rites of the Church of England. On the 16th March, 1866, he married Emma Byer at Melbourne, according to the rites of the Lutheran Church. On the 5th August, 1866, he hired a house belonging to Mrs. Janet Orr in Sussex street, Sydney, the scene of the murder. To this house Annie Scott accompanied him. Mrs. Orr saw the deceased on the 5th September for the last time. Two days after Scott called and asked if the house had been let. Mrs. Orr replies, "How could I let the house when you had the key?" She also asked, "Where is she?" (meaning deceased.) Scott replied, "She is gone." He, however, retained the key. On the 9th September, prisoner came to Mrs. Orr's house, when she asked him, "Where is your wife?" or some such words, and he replied that she was somewhere about Redfern. On the 10th he gave to Mrs. Orr the key, and several articles, as a butcher's steel and axe. He then said he had made a mistake in marrying his wife—that he thought she was a clean industrious girl and found she was not. It was proved that correspondence had taken place between Scott and his unlawful wife at Melbourne. A letter was produced in his handwriting to her giving an account of his proceedings, excusing his sending no money, and saying that he hoped in a short time they would be together. On the 12th September, 1866, this poor woman implored him to disclose to her whether he intended to return or not, concluding "your affectionate wife, EMMA SCOTT." A letter was found on the prisoner addressed to her, containing professions of love, and saying that he meant to go to Victoria in a few weeks, but that if she wanted to come to Sydney for a week or two he would send the money. Thus two separate applications had been made to him by his Melbourne wife, under date 11th June and 12th September, and the invitation to Sydney and the promise of future residence in Melbourne was made on the 7th October, about one month after the disappearance of Annie Scott. During this month a series of events happened, in perfect harmony with the position of Scott as a man upon whom weighed the responsibility and guilt of bigamy. The disappearance of his wife Annie Scott, would certainly not justify an inference that he had destroyed her, but there was nothing to lead to the idea that she had voluntarily quitted him. Almost every article of wearing apparel known to belong to her was discovered in possession of the prisoner on in the hands of persons with whom he had deposited them. It is impossible to suppose that a person voluntarily leaving her home, and in such circumstances, being the wife of the forsaken, would have left behind her all her known apparel ; and the inference therefore to be drawn with almost absolute certainty, is that the person who held that apparel had been cognisant of her disappearance, and a party to it.
    What became of her? A little dog tore up from a dust heap the remains of the woman. The head attracted the attention of a boy. The constabulary came to the search. They afterwards found at a distance, in a water-closet, the other parts of the body of a woman. In comparing the various parts they discovered that the process of dissection had been accomplished by a practised hand. When the parts were all collected, the height and frame were clearly made out. The witness who described Annie Scott said that she was a woman of large frame ; that her head was small; that her nose was prominent, or Roman ; that she was about thirty or thirty-five years of age ; that she had a mole on her arm ; that she had lost a tooth. In all these particulars the remains answered to the description of Annie Scott. The smallness of her head and her particular outline gave her that appearance which led the workmen of Rice to call her "the kangaroo." In the evidence of the skilful medical man by whom these fragments were brought together and examined, a wound was found in the skull sufficient to cause instantaneous death, and a wound had been inflicted in the breast by some round instrument such as a butcher's steel. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the remains found, though thus divided, belonged to one body, and that they were the body of a person violently deprived of life.
    But what a series of facts are accumulated in the united testimony of all these witnesses to point to the actual murderer. Various witnesses state that Annie Scott was heard to be sobbing bitterly ; that on the supposed night of the murder a dull blow was heard by the next-door neighbours ; that something heavy was heard dragged along the floor ; that Scott was afterwards seen to be wiping up what is proved to be blood ; that his clothes were saturated with blood ; that at night he was seen when carrying some substance in a state of decomposition hear the place where a part of the remains were afterwards found. There was, however, one important link besides in proving the identity of the body. Attached was a fragment of some remarkable twill stitched in a particular way and answering to the work and to the garment of Annie Scott !
    It is deplorable to think that after such an accumulation of evidence Scott solemnly protested his innocence. It was the duty of the gentlemen who so liberally performed the office of counsel to put everything in favor of the prisoner as strongly as possible, to explain the facts against him, or to suggest a doubt of his guilt. It would, indeed, be useless to place them in their position if they were to withhold any suggestion which might admit the alternative of innocence, because behind all they might have themselves the strong conviction of guilt. We could hardly suppose that any one in court doubted that ihe prisoner was the cause of the death of Annie Scott, or the motive he had in putting her to death, or the means by which it had been accomplished, or the plan he had for the concealment of his deed. All these things are transparent. It was an awful thing indeed to hear that guilty man, condemned so justly, protesting his innocence and heaping reproach upon the witnesses, and crying out, "The Almighty, before whom I stand, can bear witness that I am not guilty of this horrible crime." Such protestations, even on the scaffold, will have no weight with those who are acquainted with the conduct of many criminals.
    "cott is a man of about five feet six or seven inches in height, having intelligent and rather prepossessing features, in which there is, for the most part, a decidedly mild expression—such as is very seldom associated with the idea of a person capable of such an atrocious crime as that with which he stands charged. He has light brown hair, and a rather thin, round-shaped beard, of the same color as the hair of his head. He has also (phrenologically speaking) a good forehead, dark hazel eyes, a long nose, and (lastly) narrow, closely-compressed lips—his mouth being, perhaps, the only part of his face which conveys any disagreeable impression. The demeanor of the man," continues the 'Herald,' "is remarkably calm, respectful, and self-possessed ; that of a man fully alive to the awful nature of his position, but neither dejected by it nor unduly agitated. He pays great attention to the minutest particulars of the evidence brought to bear against him by the witnesses for the Crown, and occasionally takes such notes as he deems advisable to hand over for the assistance of the legal gentlemen who are engaged in his defence. Most of the time, however, he remains standing, observant of every incident that transpires before him in the conduct of the case apparently unmoved by all the dreadful array of witnesses (animate and inanimate) successively brought forth to speak against him."20
  • 16 Mar 1867: SCOTT, THE MURDERER.
    THE trial of William Henry Scott for the murder of his wife, part of whose remains it will be remembered were discovered in a dirt heap in Sussex-street in September last, commenced at the Criminal Court, Darlinghurst, on the 20th ult., before Mr. Justice Cheeke. Full particulars of the case have been so recently published that it is needless again to detail them ; suffice it to say, that a stronger case of circumstantial evidence could not well have been made out than that proved by the Crown. Over thirty witnesses were examined, who supplied every link necessary to bring home to the prisoner the perpetration of one of the foulest deeds ever committed in any country. Mr. Dalley exerted all his brilliant oratorical powers and forensic ability on the prisoner's behalf unavailingly, and on the evening of the third day the jury, after deliberating about two hours, brought in a verdict of guilty. When asked by the Judge why sentence of death should not be passed upon him, Scott vehemently asserted his innocence, and impugned the veracity of the witnesses brought against him. Sentence of death was then passed in the usual manner, and the prisoner was removed to that portion of the gaol allotted to condemned prisoners. The Executive have decided that the sentence shall be carried into effect on the 18th inst. Scott, who is a native of Berwick-on-Tweed, of apparently about 28 years of age, about five feet seven inches in height, and rather prepossessing appearance, became acquainted with his victim in Queensland, where he worked at his trade as butcher, and Mrs. Scott as servant in a clergyman's family.21
  • 19 Mar 1867: EXECUTION OF SCOTT - One of the most cruel and atrocious murders of modem times was yesterday morning expiated on the scaffold within the walls of Darlinghurst gaol. The circumstances of that terrible tragedy, known as the Sussex street murder, are painfully familiar to our readers and it therefore only remains for us to state that the murderer, William Henry Scott, whose insensibility or indifference to his awful position, excited the astonish ment of all who witnessed and listened to his trial, and who after his conviction protested his innocence in the most soIemn and deliberate manner, has now suffered the Iast dread penalty of the law. Since his conviction Scott has maintained the same stolid indifference to his fate that he exhibited during his trial, and he has persisted throughout in asserting his innocence. The Rev Mr Rich, Church of England chaplain of the gaol has been most assiduous in his attentions on the miser-able man, in endeavouring to prepare him for his awful fate; but it is to be feared that the effect upon the mind of Scott, who appears to have disregarded all religious instruction from his youth, was not satisfactory. The Rev. Edward Robinson was also a frequent visitor to Scott, and endeavoured to direct his thoughts from this world to the next, to which he was so speedily to pass. The wretched man ex-pressed contrition for sins generally committed, but he never in any way admitted that he was guilty of the crime for which he was condemned. Yesterday morning he was visited by his attorney to whom, it was thought, he might possibly make a confession; the answer to all inquiries on the point was that he was innocent. All the preparations for the execution having been completed the mournful procession began to move from the wing in which Scott had been confined, at a few minutes past 9 0'clock, and as soon as the spectators, of whom there were upwards of one hundred, came in view, the prisoner turned his head towards them as if to discover if there were friends or acquaintances in the crowd. Arrived at the foot of the scaffold, Scott knelt by the side of the Rev. Mr Rich and engaged several minutes in prayer; and then with a firm step, unassisted, he ascended the scaffold. When he reached the drop he turned his face to the spectators and said- "Gentlemen, I am brought here this day innocent of murder. I appear before my Maker innocent of murder. I have been guilty of other crimes but never of murder. I am truly innocent of murder - I am truly innocent of minder. I never murdered a man, woman or child in my life. I hope some of you will find out that I am telling the truth." The clergyman who had ascended the scaffold here whispered some words to Scott after which Scott resumed - "The clergyman tells me I must forgive all my enemies and prosecutors; therefore I do freely." The rev. gentleman then descended from the scaffold, and the Rev. Mr Robinson, who had been requested by the wretched man to attend him to the last, ascended to where Scott stood and addressing him said, "Have you anything to say to me?" Scott replied, " No, but I am innocent." Mr Robinson added, "Look to God for mercy", he then shook hands with him and left him to his fate. The rope was now speedily adjusted, the cap drawn over his face, and with a sudden thud, as the bolt was withdrawn, the spirit of the wretched criminal was launched into eternity.
    Scott was a strong, rather thick-set man but his neck must have been dislocated by the fall, for there were scarcely any indications of life as the suspended body swayed to and fro immediately afterwards. After the lapse of half and hour the body was cut down by prisoners for interment. We have only to add that Scott was a native of Berwick-on-Tweed; he was 27 years of age, and had been nine years in the colonies.22
  • 26 Jul 1905: NOTABLE CRIMINALS. WILLIAM HENRY SCOTT. A Butcher's Butchering. THE CRIME OF THE TIME.
    (By "Bucket.")
    On the morning of September 15, 1866 a little eleven-year-old lad, James Kilpatrick, son of an ironmoulder, working at the foundry of P. N. Russell and Co., and living in Sussex-street, made A GRUESOME DISCOVERY at a rubbish heap which had accumulated on a vacant piece of ground in the region of Barker's Mills, off Bathurst and Sussex streets. The little lad, who said that he went to church and said his prayers regularly, night and morning, was going an errand, accompanied by his dog. These animals are notoriously inquisitive, and Master Kirkpatrick's dog was no exception to thw rule which prevails among the canine race. The dog sniffed and scratched energetically at the rubbish heap of wool and refuse which had been thrown out from O. B. Ebsworth's woollen-cloth factory adjacent.
    At the inquest on the human remains found on the rubbish heap as the immediate result of the dog's scratching, the boy said : —"On Tuesday I found some ribs, which I thought were the ribs of a goat, and on Saturday, when going a message, I found a human skull in an open space on a rubbish heap behind Barker's Mills. My dog drew my attention to the heap by scratching a hole, when I saw a big bone, which I kicked over, and then I saw that it was the HEAD OF A HUMAN BEING, severed from the body. The face was down when I kicked the bone. When the dog turned up tho head it was covered with woolly refuse from the factory. The ribs which I saw on Tuesday were still there, but some distance away from the head. I found the head at the place whereon the previous Tuesday I had found the ribs. I went with my father and showed him the head, and remained there until he brought the police. I had been in the habit of passing this spot and had noticed my dog on other occasions scratching at it. The people in the neighborhood usually threw rubbish on the heap. The result of Mr. Klrtpatrick's report to the police was a General hunt in the neighborhood for the other portions of the body. Senior-sergeants Waters and Taylor, both afterwards well known in Sydney as inspectors, had charge of the case. They, and the police under them, spared no pains to make the case complete, and to clear up the mystery. The report of the finding of some human remains set certain parties thinking, with the result that Edgar Walter Weekes and David John Fitzpatrick gave important information. The former, a pastry cook, in the employ of Mr. Cripps, mentioned that he met a man coming down George-street, between 10 and 11 o'clock on a certain night ; that the man said 'My boy, would you mind helping me with a box ?' The boy consented, and the man took him to a house next door to Linsley's store, in Sussex-street, (Mr. Linsley was a grocer, within four doors of Hay-Street.) The man opened the door with a key, and both went in. The box was of tin or iron, and in removing it, Weekes said, 'IT SMELLS LIKE A CORPSE.' He knew the smell, having seen his father and brother dead. The box was so heavy that they had to rest every half-dozen steps. When they had reached Goulburn-street the lad asked what was in the box, and the man replied, 'It's only a lot of corned beef,' and looked at the lad as if he would like to eat him. The boy remarked, 'It does not smell very well,' and the man replied, 'No I am afraid it won't keep till I get it down there.' When asked where, the man first said Newcastle, and then Melbourne. When they got as far as Bowman's, at the comer of Goulburn and Sussex-streets (the Coachmakers' Arms, on the north-west corner), Weekes said that he could not carry it any farther, as it was too heavy for him. The man said, "All right, I will go and get someone else to carry it with me," and left the lad and the box in the middle of the road, saying, "Stand by, my boy; do not go away until I get somebody." The man went into Bowman's Hotel and returned with a lad, saying to Weekes, "Here you are my lad, here's threepence for you." Weekes then left, and Fitzpatrick took up the running. This young man was a shoemaker, and between 10 and 11 o'clock was in Bowman's public-house watching a game of bagatelle, when a man came in and said, 'I say, young chap, will you help me with a box?' Fitzpatrick didn't mind, and went with him to the middle of the street, where Weekes and the box were. They carried it down Liverpool street as far as Murphy's lime stores where the man tried to borrow a barrow, but failed. The two carried the box about for some time, and eventually the man decided to leave it in a yard at the back of Kelly's public-house (the Sir Walter Scott Inn, south-east corner of Bathurst and Sussex streets). The man remarked, 'There's the DAMNED PICKLE RUNNING OUT," and Fitz admitted that it was. The latter got a shilling for his trouble, and after leaving the box at the rear of Kelly's the pair walked along Sussex-street. The man went into a shop, and Fitzpatrick went home.
    Both Weekes and Fitzpatrick subsequently identified William Henry Scott the man who had employed them. Waters, Taylor and Fitzpatrick, on the morning of Sunday, October 21, went to the yard at the rear of the Sir Walter Scott, and to the w.c. found pieces of human flesh and a leg and an arm of a human being. They then caused the closet to be emptied, and in the soil found another leg, from the knee down, another arm, and a number of pieces of flesh. The remains were removed to the dead house at the Benevolent Asylum (now the site of the new railway station).
    Taylor had, on September 15, gathered up at Barker's mill the trunk, head, and other portions of a human body. These had been interred after the inquest, and were now exhumed and placed alongside the remains found at the Sir Walter Scott. The services of Dr. Arthur Renwick, then but five years in practice, were sec ... upon him devolved the task of FIXING UP THE CORPSE. The result proved the little doctor to be an artist in anatomy. When Dr. (now Sir Arthur) Renwick opened the shell of the dead-house he found a curious jumble, sheep bones and human bones being in discriminately mixed up. The doctor built up the body, which was then found to be that of a female; and as the doctor said the dissection had been performed by a butcher, or a person of similar occupation, the police had now to find the butcher — 'butcher' in more senses than one.
    It took one month's careful and active inquiry before the police felt justified in making an arrest, and then Inspector Reid sent Constable Hogan to the lodgings of a Journeyman butcher named Wm. Henry Scott, at Paddington. Hogan's instructions were to tell Scott that Mr. Reid wished to see him. When brought to the old Central Police Station, Scott was told the charge against him, when he merely remarked that he was surprised at such a charge bring brought against him. The lads Weekes and Fitzpatrick were confronted with him, and instantly identified him as the man who had employed them to carry the box with 'corned beef' a month before. Then the police court inquiry commenced. It was exhaustive. Bit by bit, link by link the chain was fitted, and unless some extraordinary development took place SCOTT WAS DOOMED. The detective police appear to have been non-existent at the time of the Sussex-street murder, or if they were in existence, they took no part in the business. Inspector-General M'Lerie was a leading witness. After all inquiries had been made he gave orders to have a journeyman butcher named Scott, lately working for Mr. Rice, butcher, of George-street North, found. Inspector Reid found him, and Hogan brought him forward. At the Central, Scott inquired what he was brought there for. Reid replied, "The murder of your wife." "My wife is living in Melhourne. I was living with a woman in Sussex-street, but we quarrelled, and she left," was the reply. Reid expressed a wish to find her, and after the usual warning, questioned Scott, who said that he did not know anyone who was acquainted with the woman ; he did not know where she came from ; he never asked her ; he first saw her in Pitt-street, near M'Carrolls butcher's shop. (Phil M'Carroll, the butcher-poet, had in 1866 half-a-dozen shops in various parts of the city. The Pitt street one was in the N.E. corner of Market-street, where the George Hotel now stands.) He got into conversation with her, and they took a walk round the racecourse (the colloquial name of Hyde Park ; races had been held there in the early days and the name had come down as a sort of heritage), he saw her again shortly afterwards, and said that he had a place in Sussex-street and invited her to come and stay with him, and she did. He did not intend her to stay long, as he expected his wife from Melbourne. The place in Sussex-street was a Mrs. Orr's house. He never saw her speak to any one but Mrs. Orr. One night going in at their own door they quarrelled. He went to a public-house at the corner of George-street to get a drink, and when he came back she was leaving with her box. He never saw her after and did not know where she was. She was about 25 years of age, with a sharp head and thin nose, and black hair, or nearly so. He called her Annie ; he had never asked her name and quarrelled with her be cause she was dirty. In a subsequent conversation—duly cautioned—with Reid, he admitted that he met the woman in Queensland, and that she was his wife. To Sergeant Taylor, Scott admitted that a letter from Melbourne was from his wife Emma Scott. He also admitted that several articles pawned by him with H. D. James, at 209 Castlereagh-street, had belonged to the "Sussex-street, woman, Annie." The iron box identified by the boys were found at Mr. Artlett's, at Rushcutters Bay. Janet Orr, a widow, residing in Sussex-street, identified Scott as the man who took a house from her in Sussex-street with a woman whom SCOTT STATED WAS HIS WIFE, she being a tall, well-made woman, good looking and pleasant. Mrs. Orr described her accurately, her peculiarities, and her clothing, some of which she identified. Mrs. Orr's description was found to tally with that of witnesses from Queensland. In the course of conversation with "Mrs. Scott." Mrs. Orr was given to understand that she was from Yorkshire, and that she had married Scott in Brisbane. The evening of this conversation was the last that Mrs. Orr saw of "Mrs. Scott." She did not see Scott for two days, and when he came he asked if she could let the house, but Mrs. Orr could not have done so, as Scott had not returned the key. He said that Mrs. Scott had left him. A few days later on he called to say that he had got the sack, and left some things to be taken care of, including a butcher's steel, which he said he would not take £5 for. This is believed to have been the weapon which made the HOLE IN THE WOMAN'S SKULL. Mary Trevillian, wife of Thomas Trevillian, gave evidence that she heard a noise as of something heavy falling in the adjoining house occupied by Scott. The falling was followed by the noise of blows, and these by something as if a body were being dragged along the floor. She never saw Mrs. Scott after hearing the noises. Fanny Smith, Phillip Sibley, Mary Wood, Susan Hinsch, and Ellen Crawford all described the woman ; a necessary proceeding in view of evidence brought from Queensland. George Fox, sexton of St. Paul's Church, Ipswich, Queensland, recognised the prisoner Scott. He knew him while employed in 1864 in Coleman's butcher's shop. On October 16, 1864. he witnessed the ceremony of marriage between Scott and a woman named Ann Ramsden. He described the woman, which description tallied with that given by Mrs. Orr and others. Ellen Mellenophy, of Newtown, proved that Scott brought blankets to be washed, all being saturated with blood, but Scott being a slaughterman she asked him if he wore them round him at his trade. He replied that he did not, but that pigs had dragged them through the MUD AND BLOOD. Other women to whom he gave things to wash gave evidence as to the blood stained condition of the articles. Tom Rice, butcher, and Robert Sylvester, in his employ, gave evidence contradicting Scott's 'slaughtering' statements, and Dr. Renwick gave in detail the surgical aspects of the matter. On the whole, Mr. W. H. Pinhey, who adjudicated, found a prima facie case made out and committed Scott for trial. The Magistrate complimented the police upon the care bestowed on the case, perhaps the most lengthy, tedious, intricate, "and unprecedented in our annals of crime." Scott was tried before Mr. Justice Cheeke, Mr. Isaacs, Solicitor-General and Mr. W. C. Windeyer appearing for the Crown, and Mr. W. B. Dalley and Mr. P. J. Healey, two EMINENT CRIMINAL LAWYERS, appearing, without fee, for Scott. No less than 33 witnesses were examined, including the clergymun who at St. Paul's, Ipswich, performed the marriage service between Scott and the murdered woman. The crime was sheeted home, and Scott was condemned to die. He was executed on March 18, 1867. After his conviction Scott displayed a reckless indifference to his fate. The Revs. Messrs. Rich and Robertson endeavored to bring him to a sense of his awful position, but neither seemed to make much impression on him. On reaching the scaffold erected in one of the yards of Darlinghurst Gaol, Scott knelt in prayer with Mr. Rich, and then firmly ascended the ladder. To the crowd assembled he said: 'Gentlemen, I am brought here this day innocent of murder. I have been guilty of other crimes, but never of murder. I never murdered a man, woman or child, in my life. I hope some of you will find out that I am telling the truth." The clergymen had told him that he must forgive his enemies and prosecutors, "which," he said, "I do freely." In answer to a specific inquiry as to whether he had anything further to say he answered "No ; but I am innocent, I never struck her." He died instantaneously.23

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, Ramsden Family Tree (familys).
  2. [S8] Queensland Government Birth, Death & Marriage Indexes "as Ann Ramsden."
  3. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  4. [S7] Registry of NSW Births Deaths and Marriages "as William H SCOTT."
  5. [S345] Index of monumental inscriptions/burials, www.findagrave.com "Burial number BN14839 - https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/188017818/…."
  6. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Thu 11 Oct 1866, p6
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13139814
  7. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Thu 18 Oct 1866, p2
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13149419
  8. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Sat 20 Oct 1866, p7
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13145962
  9. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Tue 23 Oct 1866, p9
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13150333
  10. [S14] Newspaper - The Maitland Mercury and Hunter River General Advertiser (NSW), Tue 23 Oct 1866, p2
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article18718288
  11. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Thu 25 Oct 1866, p5
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13139159
  12. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Fri 26 Oct 1866, p6
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13151322
  13. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Sat 27 Oct 1866, p7
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article28610157
  14. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Tue 30 Oct 1866, p5
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13145069
  15. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Thu 1 Nov 1866, p3
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13148613
  16. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Fri 23 Nov 1866, p5
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13147220
  17. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Thu 21 Feb 1867, p3
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13150008
  18. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Fri 22 Feb 1867, p2
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13139544
  19. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Tue 26 Feb 1867, p4
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13138685
  20. [S14] Newspaper - The Cornwall Chronicle (Launceston, Tas.), Wed 6 Mar 1867, p2
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article72186672
  21. [S14] Newspaper - Illustrated Sydney News (NSW), Sat 16 Mar 1867, p8
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article63513388
  22. [S17] Newspaper - The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW), Tue 19 Mar 1867, p4
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13146907
  23. [S14] Newspaper - Sydney Sportsman (Surry Hills, NSW), Wed 26 Jul 1905, p3
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article167206246
Last Edited13 Jun 2019

Charles Adolphus Box

M, #16152, b. 1843, d. 26 Oct 1878
Note* Baptism 12 Jan 1845 • St. Marys, Bristol, Gloucester,
Immigration 19 Mar 1855 • Arrival in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Ship 'The Governor General'
Marriage 1873 • Gulgong, New South Wales, Australia to Emma Berthé Christiané 'Beck' BEER.1 
Birth*1843 Clifton, Bristol, Gloucestershire, England.2 
Marriage*16 Mar 1867 Spouse: Emma Bertha Christina Beer. Sale, VIC, Australia.3
 
Widower6 Sep 1874Charles Adolphus Box became a widower upon the death of his wife Emma Bertha Christina Beer.4
Death*26 Oct 1878 Goulburn River, Loyola, VIC, Australia, #D1965/1879 (Age 35) found drowned in the Goulburn River on 5 Jan 1879 - buried in Jamieson Cemetery 7 Jan 1879 - last seen alive 26 Oct 1878.4,5
Inquest7 Jan 1879Inquest held 1879/25 Male. Charles A BOX Cause of death: Suicide by drowning; Location of inquest: Loyola; Date of inquest: 07 Jan 1879.6 

Family

Emma Bertha Christina Beer b. 1847, d. 6 Sep 1874
Children 1.Caroline Emma Ernstine Box+ b. 10 Feb 1870, d. 29 Jun 1941
 2.Emma Bertha Martha Box+ b. 30 May 1872, d. 1902
 3.Ernestine Anna Box+ b. Mar 1874, d. 25 Mar 1950

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, jeansmallwood1946.
  2. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, brontemplestowe.
  3. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888 "on second daughter's birth certificate."
  4. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  5. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, brontemplestowe - death certificate - left part missing.
  6. [S24] PROV (Public Records Office Victoria), VPRS 24/ P0 unit 385, item 1879/25 Male.
Last Edited12 Jun 2019

Caroline Emma Ernstine Box

F, #16153, b. 10 Feb 1870, d. 29 Jun 1941
Father*Charles Adolphus Box b. 1843, d. 26 Oct 1878
Mother*Emma Bertha Christina Beer b. 1847, d. 6 Sep 1874
Married NameBarlow. 
Married NameInman. 
Birth*10 Feb 1870 Berwick, VIC, Australia, #B939.1
Marriage*24 Oct 1888 Spouse: George Inman. 74 Canning Street, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia, #M8466.1
Widow1904Caroline Emma Ernstine Box became a widow upon the death of her husband George Inman.2,3 
Marriage-Notice*7 Jul 1907MATRIMONIAL. The following marriages have been arranged to take place at an early date:— Lambert Stace Molyneaux Barlow, 94 Mary-street, to Caroline Emma Ernestina Inman, Fremantle.4 
Marriage*17 Jul 1907 Spouse: Lambert Stace Molyneau Barlow. Fremantle, WA, Australia, #M108.3
Death*29 Jun 1941 East Coolgardie, WA, Australia, #D154.2 
Death-Notice*2 Jul 1941BARLOW.—On Sunday, June 29, at the St. John of God Hospital, Kalgoorlie, Caroline Emma Ernestine, late of Koorda, beloved mother, mother-in-law and grandmother of Mr. and Mrs. E. S. Inman and family, of Kalgoorlie ; Mr. and Mrs. G. W. Inman and Donald, of Koorda ; Mr. and Mrs. W. Chapman and family, of Carnamah ; Miss Annie Inman, of Victoria Park; Mr. R. Jones, of Morawa ; Mr. and Mrs. S. J Davies and family, of Kalgoorlie ; Miss R. Barlow, of Goomalling. Privately interred in the Seventh Day Adventist portion of the Kalgoorlie Cemetery on Tuesday, July 1, 1941. W. Strother, Funeral Director, Kalgoorlie, Coolgardie and Menzies. Phone 327.5 

Citations

  1. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  2. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, brontemplestowe.
  3. [S62] Western Australian Government. BDM Index Western Australia.
  4. [S14] Newspaper - Sunday Times (Perth, WA), Sun 7 Jul 1907, p14
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article57230219
  5. [S14] Newspaper - Kalgoorlie Miner (WA), Wed 2 Jul 1941, p4
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article95127198
Last Edited13 Jun 2019

Emma Bertha Martha Box

F, #16154, b. 30 May 1872, d. 1902
Father*Charles Adolphus Box b. 1843, d. 26 Oct 1878
Mother*Emma Bertha Christina Beer b. 1847, d. 6 Sep 1874
Married NamePage.1 
Birth*30 May 1872 Harkaway, VIC, Australia, #B14280.2
Marriage*24 Jul 1889 Spouse: Harold James Page. 212 Dryburgh Street, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia, #M6279.1,3
Death*1902 Gaffneys Creek, VIC, Australia, #D1738 (Age 30.)4 

Family

Harold James Page b. 1863, d. 1905
Children 1.Charles Harold Page b. 1890
 2.Raymond Samuel Page b. 1891, d. 8 May 1917
 3.Beatrice Emma Page b. 1895
 4.Ethel Frances Page b. 1897
 5.Vere Walter Page b. 1900

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, brontemplestowe.
  2. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888 "see certificate, lists parent's marriage as 16 March 1867 at Sale. One older sister Caroline Emma Ernestine 2 1/2 years. Fatehr Charles Adolphus Box, Saddler, 29 born Bristol England. Mother Emma Bertha Christine Beer, 25 born Neuchirt Prussia."
  3. [S2] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Federation Index Victoria 1889-1901.
  4. [S3] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Edwardian Index Victoria 1902-1913.
Last Edited5 Nov 2016

Ernestine Anna Box

F, #16155, b. Mar 1874, d. 25 Mar 1950
Father*Charles Adolphus Box b. 1843, d. 26 Oct 1878
Mother*Emma Bertha Christina Beer b. 1847, d. 6 Sep 1874
Married NameSimmons.1 
Birth*Mar 1874 Berwick, VIC, Australia, #B772.2 
Marriage*1895 Spouse: Walter Simmons. VIC, Australia, #M6956.1
 
Widow18 Nov 1947Ernestine Anna Box became a widow upon the death of her husband Walter Simmons.3 
Death*25 Mar 1950 Fitzroy, VIC, Australia, #D3040 (Age 76.)3 
Death-Notice*27 Mar 1950SIMMONS (nee Box).—On March 25, at Melbourne, Ernestine Anna Simmons, of 43 Freeman street, North Fitzroy, and formerly of Emerald and Harkaway, the dearly loved wife of the late Walter Simmons, of Mt. Burnett, and loving mother of Lorris and Raymond, and loved grandmother of Lorris, aged 76 years.
SIMMONS (nee Box).—The Friends of the late Mrs. ERNESTINE ANNA SIMMONS, of 43 Freeman street, North Fitzroy, and formerly of Emerald and Harkaway, are notified that her Funeral will leave our parlour, 10 Walker street, Dandenong, THIS DAY, at 1.30 p.m., for the Harkaway Cemetery, arriving about 2 p.m.4 

Citations

  1. [S2] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Federation Index Victoria 1889-1901.
  2. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  3. [S5] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Death Index Victoria 1921-1985.
  4. [S11] Newspaper - The Argus (Melbourne, Vic.), 27 Mar 1950, p10.
Last Edited5 Nov 2016

Harold James Page

M, #16160, b. 1863, d. 1905
Birth*18631 
Marriage*24 Jul 1889 Spouse: Emma Bertha Martha Box. 212 Dryburgh Street, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia, #M6279.1,2
Widower1902Harold James Page became a widower upon the death of his wife Emma Bertha Martha Box.3 
Death*19051 

Family

Emma Bertha Martha Box b. 30 May 1872, d. 1902
Children 1.Charles Harold Page b. 1890
 2.Raymond Samuel Page b. 1891, d. 8 May 1917
 3.Beatrice Emma Page b. 1895
 4.Ethel Frances Page b. 1897
 5.Vere Walter Page b. 1900

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, brontemplestowe.
  2. [S2] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Federation Index Victoria 1889-1901.
  3. [S3] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Edwardian Index Victoria 1902-1913.
Last Edited5 Nov 2016

Raymond Samuel Page

M, #16161, b. 1891, d. 8 May 1917
Father*Harold James Page b. 1863, d. 1905
Mother*Emma Bertha Martha Box b. 30 May 1872, d. 1902
Note* On Emerald ANZAC Walk Memorial. 
Birth*1891 Maffra, VIC, Australia, #B34744.1 
Death*8 May 1917 France (Age 25.) 

Citations

  1. [S2] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Federation Index Victoria 1889-1901.
Last Edited31 Oct 2016

George Inman

M, #16162, b. 1856, d. 1904
Birth*1856 Dumfries, Scotland.1 
Marriage*24 Oct 1888 Spouse: Caroline Emma Ernstine Box. 74 Canning Street, North Melbourne, VIC, Australia, #M8466.2
Death*1904 WA, Australia, #D900 (Age 48.)1,3 
Death-Notice*8 Feb 1904INMAN.—The Friends of the late George Inman, of Fremantle, W.A., are respectfully invited to follow his remains to the place of interment, the Church of Christ Cemetery, Fremantle. The Funeral is appointed to leave Mr. Donald J. Chipper's Undertaking Establishment, Adelaide-street, Fremantle, at 11 o'clock THIS (Monday) MORNING.4 

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, brontemplestowe.
  2. [S1] Registry of Births Deaths and Marriages Pioneer Index Victoria 1836-1888.
  3. [S62] Western Australian Government. BDM Index Western Australia.
  4. [S14] Newspaper - The West Australian (Perth, WA), Mon 8 Feb 1904, p1.
Last Edited31 Oct 2016

Lambert Stace Molyneau Barlow

M, #16165, b. 1 Feb 1878, d. 2 Feb 1951
Birth*1 Feb 1878 Bengal, India. [par John William Nixon BARLOW & Mary Caroline STACE]1 
Marriage-Notice*7 Jul 1907MATRIMONIAL. The following marriages have been arranged to take place at an early date:— Lambert Stace Molyneaux Barlow, 94 Mary-street, to Caroline Emma Ernestina Inman, Fremantle.2 
Marriage*17 Jul 1907 Spouse: Caroline Emma Ernstine Box. Fremantle, WA, Australia, #M108.3
Widower29 Jun 1941Lambert Stace Molyneau Barlow became a widower upon the death of his wife Caroline Emma Ernstine Box.4 
Death*2 Feb 1951 Perth, WA, Australia, #D285.3 
Death-Notice3 Feb 1951BARLOW: The Friends of the late Mr. Lambert M. S. Barlow, of Nedlands, are respectfully invited to follow his remains to the place of interment, the Anglican Cemetery, Karrakatta. The Funeral is appointed to leave Messrs. Bowra and O'Dea's Private Mortuary, 195 Pier-street. Perth, at 10.20 o'clock THIS (Saturday) MORNING, arriving at the Cemetery at 10.45 o'clock. BOWRA AND O'DEA. 195
Pier-street, Perth.5 
Death-Notice*5 Feb 1951BARLOW, Lambert (Bill): Fond memories of pop by Gloria and Wayne.
A good man at rest.6 
Death-Notice7 Feb 1951BARLOW: On February 2, 1951. Lambert M. S. Barlow, dearly loved father of May (Mrs. G. Carvell, of 52 Newcastle-street, Perth), and Daisy (Mrs. L. Bolger), fond father-in-law of George and Leg, loving grandfather of Ron and Dot. Interred in the Anglican Cemetery, Karrakatta, on Saturday morning. At rest.7 

Citations

  1. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, mbeard45 (Lawrence/Hammond/Wybar Family Tree).
  2. [S14] Newspaper - Sunday Times (Perth, WA), Sun 7 Jul 1907, p14
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article57230219
  3. [S62] Western Australian Government. BDM Index Western Australia.
  4. [S80] Ancestry - Family Tree, brontemplestowe.
  5. [S14] Newspaper - The West Australian (Perth, WA), Sat 3 Feb 1951, p31
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article48149184
  6. [S14] Newspaper - The West Australian (Perth, WA), Mon 5 Feb 1951, p25
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article48149351
  7. [S14] Newspaper - The West Australian (Perth, WA), Wed 7 Feb 1951, p27
    http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article48149769
Last Edited13 Jun 2019
 

NOTE

Some family sections show only the children who were associated with Upper Beaconsfield.

Some individuals may be featured because members of their family were associated with the Upper Beaconsfield area, even though they themselves never lived here.